Arc Graphics 140V vs Arc A730M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A730M and Arc Graphics 140V, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc A730M
2022
12 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
27.27
+103%

Arc A730M outperforms Arc Graphics 140V by a whopping 103% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking205383
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency23.52no data
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Xe² (2025)
GPU code nameDG2-512Lunar Lake iGPU
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date2022 (3 years ago)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 cores30728
Core clock speed1100 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2050 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors21,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology6 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Wattno data
Texture fill rate393.6no data
Floating-point processing power12.6 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs192no data
Tensor Cores384no data
Ray Tracing Cores24no 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16no data

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 typeGDDR6LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount12 GB16 GB
Memory bus width192 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1750 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth336.0 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12_2
Shader Model6.6no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-

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 A730M 27.27
+103%
Arc Graphics 140V 13.41

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Arc A730M 10487
+103%
Arc Graphics 140V 5158

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 A730M 29144
+173%
Arc Graphics 140V 10688

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 A730M 63380
+62.3%
Arc Graphics 140V 39055

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 A730M 21294
+124%
Arc Graphics 140V 9492

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 A730M 83396
+57.3%
Arc Graphics 140V 53014

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Arc A730M 8813
+118%
Arc Graphics 140V 4038

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 HD74
+85%
40
−85%
1440p39
+95%
20
−95%
4K25
+108%
12−14
−108%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60
+33.3%
45
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 71
+137%
30−33
−137%
Elden Ring 56
+40%
40−45
−40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+86.4%
40−45
−86.4%
Counter-Strike 2 63
+70.3%
37
−70.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+129%
14−16
−129%
Forza Horizon 4 178
+128%
78
−128%
Metro Exodus 84
+127%
35−40
−127%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+70.6%
30−35
−70.6%
Valorant 112
+111%
50−55
−111%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+86.4%
40−45
−86.4%
Counter-Strike 2 54
+80%
30
−80%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+125%
12−14
−125%
Dota 2 78
+77.3%
44
−77.3%
Elden Ring 95
+138%
40−45
−138%
Far Cry 5 39
+11.4%
35
−11.4%
Fortnite 130−140
+75%
75−80
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 149
+129%
65
−129%
Grand Theft Auto V 72
+67.4%
43
−67.4%
Metro Exodus 57
+54.1%
35−40
−54.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+67.7%
95−100
−67.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+70.6%
30−35
−70.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90−95
+120%
40−45
−120%
Valorant 72
+35.8%
50−55
−35.8%
World of Tanks 260−270
+47.8%
180−190
−47.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+86.4%
40−45
−86.4%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+108%
25
−108%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+117%
12−14
−117%
Dota 2 80
+129%
35−40
−129%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+58.8%
50−55
−58.8%
Forza Horizon 4 124
+118%
57
−118%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+67.7%
95−100
−67.7%
Valorant 102
+92.5%
50−55
−92.5%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 45−50
+161%
18
−161%
Elden Ring 55
+175%
20−22
−175%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+147%
18−20
−147%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+106%
85−90
−106%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
World of Tanks 170−180
+88.4%
95−100
−88.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+100%
27−30
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+71.4%
14
−71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+114%
7−8
−114%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+165%
30−35
−165%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+131%
30−35
−131%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+114%
27−30
−114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+141%
16−18
−141%
Valorant 71
+115%
30−35
−115%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Dota 2 34
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Elden Ring 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Metro Exodus 21
+133%
9−10
−133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+115%
35−40
−115%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Dota 2 45−50
+129%
21−24
−129%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+118%
16−18
−118%
Fortnite 35−40
+133%
14−16
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 54
+200%
18−20
−200%
Valorant 35−40
+164%
14−16
−164%

This is how Arc A730M and Arc Graphics 140V compete in popular games:

  • Arc A730M is 85% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A730M is 95% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A730M is 108% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A730M is 213% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Arc A730M surpassed Arc Graphics 140V in all 54 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 27.27 13.41
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 3 nm

Arc A730M has a 103.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc Graphics 140V, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A730M is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc Graphics 140V in performance tests.


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 A730M
Arc A730M
Intel Arc Graphics 140V
Arc Graphics 140V

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.


3.8 110 votes

Rate Arc A730M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 9 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140V 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.