Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Arc A530M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A530M with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Arc A530M
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 65 Watt
16.31
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
2024
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
23.51
+44.1%

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms Arc A530M by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking306213
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency19.8253.06
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameDG2-256AD107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 August 2023 (1 year ago)26 February 2024 (1 year 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 cores15362048
Core clock speed900 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speed1300 MHz2025 MHz
Number of transistors11,500 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate124.8129.6
Floating-point processing power3.994 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs9664
Tensor Cores19264
Ray Tracing Cores1216

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS++

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
−38.3%
65−70
+38.3%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
−37.3%
140−150
+37.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
−38.3%
65−70
+38.3%
Battlefield 5 75−80
−33.3%
100−105
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
−37.3%
140−150
+37.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−41.7%
85−90
+41.7%
Fortnite 95−100
−35.4%
130−140
+35.4%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−37%
100−105
+37%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
−40.4%
80−85
+40.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
Valorant 130−140
−39.7%
190−200
+39.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
−38.3%
65−70
+38.3%
Battlefield 5 75−80
−33.3%
100−105
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
−37.3%
140−150
+37.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
−35.7%
300−310
+35.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−41.7%
85−90
+41.7%
Fortnite 95−100
−35.4%
130−140
+35.4%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−37%
100−105
+37%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
−40.4%
80−85
+40.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−31.6%
50−55
+31.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−40%
70−75
+40%
Valorant 130−140
−39.7%
190−200
+39.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
−33.3%
100−105
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−41.7%
85−90
+41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−37%
100−105
+37%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−40%
70−75
+40%
Valorant 130−140
−39.7%
190−200
+39.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 95−100
−35.4%
130−140
+35.4%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
−39.5%
180−190
+39.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−39.4%
230−240
+39.4%
Valorant 170−180
−39.5%
240−250
+39.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−40%
70−75
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−37.5%
55−60
+37.5%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−36.4%
60−65
+36.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
−37.5%
55−60
+37.5%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−40.6%
45−50
+40.6%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%
Valorant 100−105
−40%
140−150
+40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−29%
40−45
+29%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.31 23.51
Recency 1 August 2023 26 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

Arc A530M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 44.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A530M in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A530M is a notebook graphics card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 A530M
Arc A530M
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation

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.


3.8 206 votes

Rate Arc A530M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 20 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc A530M or RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.