Riva TNT2 vs Arc A750

Place in the ranking	210	1588
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	52.70	no data
Power efficiency	10.30	no data
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	Fahrenheit (1998−2000)
GPU code name	DG2-512	NV5
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	12 October 2022 (3 years ago)	12 October 1999 (26 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$289	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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	3584	no data
Core clock speed	2050 MHz	125 MHz
Boost clock speed	2400 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	21,700 million	15 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	250 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	537.6	0.25
Floating-point processing power	17.2 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	112	2
TMUs	224	2
Tensor Cores	448	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	28	no data
L2 Cache	16 MB	no 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).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x16	AGP 4x
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	None

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	SDR
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	150 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512.0 GB/s	2.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data
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 Connectors	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0	1x VGA
HDMI	+	-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	6.0
Shader Model	6.6	no data
OpenGL	4.6	1.2
OpenCL	3.0	N/A
Vulkan	1.3	N/A
DLSS	+	-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Arc A750 30.14
+301300%

Riva TNT2 0.01

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 A750 12604
+420033%

Samples: 1539

Riva TNT2 3
Samples: 24

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	107	-0−1
1440p	60	-0−1
4K	36	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.70	no data
1440p	4.82	no data
4K	8.03	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2	336	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	75	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	111	0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5	110−120	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	270	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	66	0−1
Far Cry 5	111	0−1
Fortnite	140−150	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	112	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	132	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	85	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130	0−1
Valorant	190−200	0−1

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5	110−120	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	144	0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	270−280	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	58	0−1
Far Cry 5	102	0−1
Fortnite	140−150	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	106	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	121	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	99	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	68	0−1
Metro Exodus	105	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	185	0−1
Valorant	190−200	0−1

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	110−120	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	55	0−1
Far Cry 5	98	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	55	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	69	0−1
Valorant	190−200	0−1

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite

140−150

0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	89	0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	210−220	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	41	0−1
Metro Exodus	65	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180	0−1
Valorant	220−230	0−1

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	80−85	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	42	0−1
Far Cry 5	76	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	79	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	42	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	57	0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

75−80

0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2	20	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	45	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	43	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	69	0−1
Valorant	180−190	0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	45−50	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30−35	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	23	0−1
Far Cry 5	45	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	61	0−1
Hogwarts Legacy	23	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40	0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite

35−40

0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.14	0.01
Recency	12 October 2022	12 October 1999
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 MB
Chip lithography	6 nm	250 nm

Arc A750 has a 301300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 23 years, a 51100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 4066.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Riva TNT2 in performance tests.