Radeon RX 7800 XT vs Arc A350M

Place in the ranking	358	30
Place by popularity	not in top-100	60
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	67.89
Power efficiency	40.38	16.53
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	DG2-128	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	30 March 2022 (2 years ago)	25 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	768	3840
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1295 MHz
Boost clock speed	1150 MHz	2430 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	263 Watt
Texture fill rate	55.20	583.2
Floating-point processing power	1.766 TFLOPS	37.32 TFLOPS
ROPs	24	96
TMUs	48	240
Ray Tracing Cores	6	60

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).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	2x 8-pin

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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	2438 MHz
Memory bandwidth	112.0 GB/s	624.1 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.6	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Arc A350M 14.63

RX 7800 XT 63.01
+331%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Arc A350M 10730

RX 7800 XT 65611
+511%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Arc A350M 31023

RX 7800 XT 134322
+333%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Arc A350M 7147

RX 7800 XT 49707
+595%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Arc A350M 36315

RX 7800 XT 202773
+458%

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 HD	35 −514%	215 +514%
1440p	16 −663%	122 +663%
4K	8 −813%	73 +813%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.32
1440p	no data	4.09
4K	no data	6.84

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −827%	241 +827%
Cyberpunk 2077	27 −856%	258 +856%
Elden Ring	22 −923%	225 +923%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −144%	110−120 +144%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −669%	200 +669%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 −967%	96 +967%
Forza Horizon 4	66 −639%	488 +639%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −328%	171 +328%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −219%	110−120 +219%
Valorant	56 −423%	290−300 +423%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −144%	110−120 +144%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −527%	163 +527%
Cyberpunk 2077	8 −900%	80 +900%
Dota 2	38 −368%	178 +368%
Elden Ring	42 −469%	230−240 +469%
Far Cry 5	27 −319%	113 +319%
Fortnite	80−85 −201%	240−250 +201%
Forza Horizon 4	53 −651%	398 +651%
Grand Theft Auto V	26 −585%	178 +585%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −268%	147 +268%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −103%	210−220 +103%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −219%	110−120 +219%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −287%	170−180 +287%
Valorant	55−60 −405%	290−300 +405%
World of Tanks	190−200 −46.1%	270−280 +46.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −144%	110−120 +144%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −473%	149 +473%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 −1133%	74 +1133%
Dota 2	59 −324%	250−260 +324%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −128%	120−130 +128%
Forza Horizon 4	45 −656%	340 +656%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −103%	210−220 +103%
Valorant	55−60 −405%	290−300 +405%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10 −1300%	140 +1300%
Elden Ring	17 −829%	150−160 +829%
Grand Theft Auto V	10 −1300%	140 +1300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 −37.8%	170−180 +37.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −485%	75−80 +485%
World of Tanks	100−110 −311%	400−450 +311%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −200%	85−90 +200%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −646%	97 +646%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 −336%	48 +336%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −357%	160−170 +357%
Forza Horizon 4	37 −557%	243 +557%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −363%	148 +363%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −674%	147 +674%
Valorant	35−40 −608%	250−260 +608%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −320%	42 +320%
Dota 2	11 −1282%	152 +1282%
Elden Ring	3 −2633%	80−85 +2633%
Grand Theft Auto V	11 −1282%	152 +1282%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −530%	63 +530%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −386%	200−210 +386%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −456%	50−55 +456%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 −1282%	152 +1282%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −479%	80−85 +479%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −650%	75−80 +650%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −450%	22 +450%
Dota 2	24−27 −323%	110−120 +323%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −483%	100−110 +483%
Fortnite	16−18 −465%	95−100 +465%
Forza Horizon 4	19 −584%	130 +584%
Valorant	16−18 −806%	140−150 +806%

This is how Arc A350M and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7800 XT is 514% faster in 1080p
RX 7800 XT is 663% faster in 1440p
RX 7800 XT is 813% faster in 4K

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

in Elden Ring, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7800 XT is 2633% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 7800 XT surpassed Arc A350M in all 61 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.63	63.01
Recency	30 March 2022	25 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	263 Watt

Arc A350M has 952% lower power consumption.

RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 330.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A350M in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A350M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 7800 XT is a desktop one.

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