Radeon RX 7800 XT vs Arc A730M

Place in the ranking	207	30
Place by popularity	not in top-100	60
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	67.92
Power efficiency	23.53	16.53
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	DG2-512	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	2022 (3 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	3072	3840
Core clock speed	1100 MHz	1295 MHz
Boost clock speed	2050 MHz	2430 MHz
Number of transistors	21,700 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	263 Watt
Texture fill rate	393.6	583.2
Floating-point processing power	12.6 TFLOPS	37.32 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	96
TMUs	192	240
Tensor Cores	384	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	24	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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 4.0 x16	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	12 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	2438 MHz
Memory bandwidth	336.0 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	Portable Device Dependent	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 A730M 27.29

RX 7800 XT 63.02
+131%

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

RX 7800 XT 24221
+131%

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

RX 7800 XT 65611
+125%

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

RX 7800 XT 134322
+112%

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

RX 7800 XT 49707
+133%

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

RX 7800 XT 202773
+143%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Arc A730M 467230

RX 7800 XT 745990
+59.7%

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	74 −191%	215 +191%
1440p	39 −213%	122 +213%
4K	25 −188%	72 +188%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.32
1440p	no data	4.09
4K	no data	6.93

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	60 −302%	241 +302%
Cyberpunk 2077	71 −263%	258 +263%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −42.7%	110−120 +42.7%
Counter-Strike 2	63 −217%	200 +217%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 −200%	96 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	178 −174%	488 +174%
Forza Horizon 5	60 −167%	160−170 +167%
Metro Exodus	84 −104%	171 +104%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 −98.3%	110−120 +98.3%
Valorant	112 −163%	290−300 +163%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −42.7%	110−120 +42.7%
Counter-Strike 2	54 −202%	163 +202%
Cyberpunk 2077	27 −196%	80 +196%
Dota 2	78 −128%	178 +128%
Far Cry 5	39 −190%	113 +190%
Fortnite	130−140 −85.7%	240−250 +85.7%
Forza Horizon 4	149 −167%	398 +167%
Forza Horizon 5	70−75 −122%	160−170 +122%
Grand Theft Auto V	72 −147%	178 +147%
Metro Exodus	57 −158%	147 +158%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 −29.5%	210−220 +29.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 −98.3%	110−120 +98.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 −93.3%	170−180 +93.3%
Valorant	72 −308%	290−300 +308%
World of Tanks	260−270 −4.9%	270−280 +4.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −42.7%	110−120 +42.7%
Counter-Strike 2	43 −247%	149 +247%
Cyberpunk 2077	26 −185%	74 +185%
Dota 2	80 −125%	180−190 +125%
Far Cry 5	80−85 −50.6%	120−130 +50.6%
Forza Horizon 4	124 −174%	340 +174%
Forza Horizon 5	47 −240%	160−170 +240%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 −29.5%	210−220 +29.5%
Valorant	102 −188%	290−300 +188%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45−50 −198%	140 +198%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 −198%	140 +198%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −204%	75−80 +204%
World of Tanks	170−180 −137%	400−450 +137%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −61.1%	85−90 +61.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −213%	97 +213%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 −220%	48 +220%
Far Cry 5	80−85 −95.1%	160−170 +95.1%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 −228%	243 +228%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −164%	110−120 +164%
Metro Exodus	60−65 −139%	148 +139%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −250%	147 +250%
Valorant	71 −259%	250−260 +259%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −68%	42 +68%
Dota 2	34 −347%	152 +347%
Grand Theft Auto V	34 −347%	152 +347%
Metro Exodus	21 −200%	63 +200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 −149%	200−210 +149%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −194%	50−55 +194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	34 −347%	152 +347%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −179%	80−85 +179%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −200%	75−80 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −120%	22 +120%
Dota 2	45−50 −129%	110−120 +129%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −184%	100−110 +184%
Fortnite	35−40 −174%	95−100 +174%
Forza Horizon 4	54 −141%	130 +141%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 −209%	70−75 +209%
Valorant	35−40 −292%	140−150 +292%

This is how Arc A730M and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7800 XT is 191% faster in 1080p
RX 7800 XT is 213% faster in 1440p
RX 7800 XT is 188% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7800 XT is 347% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 7800 XT is ahead in 61 test (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	27.29	63.02
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	263 Watt

Arc A730M has 228.8% lower power consumption.

RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 130.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 33.3% 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 A730M in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A730M 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.