GRID K140Q vs Arc A350M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Arc A350M
2022
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
14.30
+661%

Arc A350M outperforms GRID K140Q by a whopping 661% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking342872
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureXe HPG (2020−2022)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameAlchemistGK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date30 March 2022 (2 years ago)28 June 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$125

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores6192
Core clock speed1150 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,200 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt (25 - 35 Watt TGP)130 Watt
Texture fill rate55.2013.60
Floating-point performanceno data326.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Arc A350M and GRID K140Q compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR6DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed14000 MHz1782 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/s28.51 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.65.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.31.1.126
CUDAno data3.0

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD35
+775%
4−5
−775%
1440p17
+750%
2−3
−750%
4K9
+800%
1−2
−800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27
+800%
3−4
−800%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35
+775%
4−5
−775%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+667%
6−7
−667%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+675%
4−5
−675%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+850%
2−3
−850%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+680%
5−6
−680%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Hitman 3 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+667%
6−7
−667%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+760%
5−6
−760%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 66
+725%
8−9
−725%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20
+900%
2−3
−900%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+667%
6−7
−667%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+675%
4−5
−675%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+700%
2−3
−700%
Far Cry 5 27
+800%
3−4
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Hitman 3 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+667%
6−7
−667%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+760%
5−6
−760%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+800%
3−4
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43
+760%
5−6
−760%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16
+700%
2−3
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+675%
4−5
−675%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+680%
5−6
−680%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+667%
6−7
−667%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+760%
5−6
−760%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+850%
2−3
−850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%
Hitman 3 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 0−1
Far Cry 5 25
+733%
3−4
−733%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+867%
3−4
−867%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+733%
3−4
−733%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+825%
4−5
−825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 20
+900%
2−3
−900%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Hitman 3 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

This is how Arc A350M and GRID K140Q compete in popular games:

  • Arc A350M is 775% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A350M is 750% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A350M is 800% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.30 1.88
Recency 30 March 2022 28 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 130 Watt

The Arc A350M is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K140Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A350M is a notebook card while GRID K140Q is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Arc A350M
Arc A350M
NVIDIA GRID K140Q
GRID K140Q

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 54 votes

Rate Arc A350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GRID K140Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.