ATI Radeon IGP 340M vs Arc A350M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4211603
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency40.22no data
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Rage 6 (2000−2007)
GPU code nameDG2-128RS200
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 March 2022 (3 years ago)5 October 2002 (23 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7682
Core clock speed300 MHz183 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHz180 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Wattno data
Texture fill rate55.200.37
Floating-point processing power1.766 TFLOPSno data
ROPs242
TMUs482
Ray Tracing Cores6no data
L1 Cache1.1 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8AGP 4x
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+
Resizable BAR+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)7.0
Shader Model6.6no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A

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 HD36no data
1440p17no data
4K9no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 70−75 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 27 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 38
+660%
5−6
−660%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 55−60 no data
Counter-Strike 2 70−75 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 19 0−1
Far Cry 5 42 no data
Fortnite 75−80 no data
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+2700%
2−3
−2700%
Forza Horizon 5 50 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 25
+400%
5−6
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
Valorant 110−120
+396%
21−24
−396%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 55−60 no data
Counter-Strike 2 70−75 no data
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+1944%
9−10
−1944%
Cyberpunk 2077 16 0−1
Dota 2 62
+786%
7−8
−786%
Far Cry 5 39 no data
Fortnite 75−80 no data
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+2700%
2−3
−2700%
Forza Horizon 5 47 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 26 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 20
+300%
5−6
−300%
Metro Exodus 27−30 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43
+760%
5−6
−760%
Valorant 110−120
+396%
21−24
−396%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 12 0−1
Dota 2 59
+743%
7−8
−743%
Far Cry 5 37 no data
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+2700%
2−3
−2700%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+280%
5−6
−280%
Valorant 110−120
+396%
21−24
−396%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 no data

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 10 no data
Metro Exodus 16−18 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120 no data
Valorant 130−140 no data

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 no data
Far Cry 5 25 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Hogwarts Legacy 10 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30 no data

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 11
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9 no data
Metro Exodus 9−10 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15 no data
Valorant 70−75 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20 no data
Counter-Strike 2 9−10 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 no data
Dota 2 45−50 no data
Far Cry 5 12 no data
Forza Horizon 4 21−24 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 3 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A350M is 3100% faster.
  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the ATI IGP 340M is 27% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A350M performs better in 23 tests (96%)
  • ATI IGP 340M performs better in 1 test (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 March 2022 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 6 nm 180 nm

Arc A350M has an age advantage of 19 years, and a 2900% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Arc A350M and Radeon IGP 340M. We've got no test results to judge.

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
ATI Radeon IGP 340M
Radeon IGP 340M

Other comparisons

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.


3.3 76 votes

Rate Arc A350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 340M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc A350M or Radeon IGP 340M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.