Radeon PRO W7700 vs Arc A770

Place in the ranking	154	36
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	55.19	70.00
Power efficiency	10.49	21.48
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	DG2-512	Navi 32
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)	13 November 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$329	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7700 has 27% better value for money than Arc A770.

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	4096	3072
Core clock speed	2100 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	2400 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	21,700 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	614.4	499.2
Floating-point processing power	19.66 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	128	96
TMUs	256	192
Tensor Cores	512	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	32	48

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	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 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	16 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512.0 GB/s	576.0 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	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0	4x 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 A770 34.21

PRO W7700 59.16
+72.9%

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 A770 13154

PRO W7700 22747
+72.9%

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	112 −69.6%	190−200 +69.6%
1440p	64 −71.9%	110−120 +71.9%
4K	41 −70.7%	70−75 +70.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.94 +79%	5.26 −79%
1440p	5.14 +76.7%	9.08 −76.7%
4K	8.02 +77.9%	14.27 −77.9%

Arc A770 has 79% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Arc A770 has 77% lower cost per frame in 1440p
Arc A770 has 78% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	116 −72.4%	200−210 +72.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 −66.7%	120−130 +66.7%
Elden Ring	88 −70.5%	150−160 +70.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 −66.7%	160−170 +66.7%
Counter-Strike 2	99 −71.7%	170−180 +71.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 −66.7%	120−130 +66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	304 −64.5%	500−550 +64.5%
Metro Exodus	120 −66.7%	200−210 +66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −59.4%	110−120 +59.4%
Valorant	130−140 −69.1%	230−240 +69.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 −66.7%	160−170 +66.7%
Counter-Strike 2	88 −70.5%	150−160 +70.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 −66.7%	120−130 +66.7%
Dota 2	105 −71.4%	180−190 +71.4%
Elden Ring	110−120 −70.9%	200−210 +70.9%
Far Cry 5	71 −69%	120−130 +69%
Fortnite	150−160 −66.7%	260−270 +66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	258 −55%	400−450 +55%
Grand Theft Auto V	105 −71.4%	180−190 +71.4%
Metro Exodus	99 −71.7%	170−180 +71.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −58.7%	300−310 +58.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −59.4%	110−120 +59.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 −69.5%	200−210 +69.5%
Valorant	130−140 −69.1%	230−240 +69.1%
World of Tanks	270−280 −61.9%	450−500 +61.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 −66.7%	160−170 +66.7%
Counter-Strike 2	83 −68.7%	140−150 +68.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 −66.7%	120−130 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −64.8%	150−160 +64.8%
Forza Horizon 4	216 −62%	350−400 +62%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −58.7%	300−310 +58.7%
Valorant	130−140 −69.1%	230−240 +69.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45 −66.7%	75−80 +66.7%
Elden Ring	65−70 −66.7%	110−120 +66.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 −66.7%	75−80 +66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −71.4%	300−310 +71.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −66.7%	55−60 +66.7%
World of Tanks	210−220 −59.8%	350−400 +59.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −66.7%	110−120 +66.7%
Counter-Strike 2	59 −69.5%	100−105 +69.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −66.7%	55−60 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	100−110 −65.1%	180−190 +65.1%
Forza Horizon 4	158 −70.9%	270−280 +70.9%
Metro Exodus	91 −64.8%	150−160 +64.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60 −66.7%	100−105 +66.7%
Valorant	100−110 −66.7%	170−180 +66.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	28 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
Dota 2	48 −66.7%	80−85 +66.7%
Elden Ring	30−35 −61.3%	50−55 +61.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	48 −66.7%	80−85 +66.7%
Metro Exodus	47 −70.2%	80−85 +70.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −66.7%	180−190 +66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −59.1%	35−40 +59.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	48 −66.7%	80−85 +66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −66.7%	65−70 +66.7%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −61.8%	55−60 +61.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −71.4%	24−27 +71.4%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −66.7%	80−85 +66.7%
Fortnite	45−50 −63%	75−80 +63%
Forza Horizon 4	89 −68.5%	150−160 +68.5%
Valorant	50−55 −63.5%	85−90 +63.5%

This is how Arc A770 and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 70% faster in 1080p
PRO W7700 is 72% faster in 1440p
PRO W7700 is 71% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	34.21	59.16
Recency	12 October 2022	13 November 2023
Chip lithography	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	190 Watt

PRO W7700 has a 72.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 18.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A770 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A770 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

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