UHD Graphics 750 vs Arc Graphics 140V
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc Graphics 140V with UHD Graphics 750, including specs and performance data.
Arc Graphics 140V outperforms UHD Graphics 750 by a whopping 198% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 384 | 663 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 20.74 |
| Architecture | Xe² (2025) | Generation 12.1 (2020−2021) |
| GPU code name | Lunar Lake iGPU | Rocket Lake GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | no data | 30 March 2021 (3 years 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 cores | 8 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2050 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 3 nm | 14 nm+++ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 20.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6656 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
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 | no data | Ring Bus |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | LPDDR5x | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | no data | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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 | no data | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2 |
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.
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.
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 | 40
+233%
| 12−14
−233%
|
| 1440p | 20
+233%
| 6−7
−233%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45
+350%
|
10−11
−350%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+238%
|
12−14
−238%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 37
+270%
|
10−11
−270%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 78
+311%
|
18−20
−311%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+338%
|
8−9
−338%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+270%
|
10−11
−270%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+143%
|
14−16
−143%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+350%
|
12−14
−350%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+238%
|
12−14
−238%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30
+200%
|
10−11
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 44
+214%
|
14−16
−214%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35
+52.2%
|
21−24
−52.2%
|
| Fortnite | 75−80
+192%
|
24−27
−192%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65
+242%
|
18−20
−242%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+338%
|
8−9
−338%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 43
+207%
|
14−16
−207%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+270%
|
10−11
−270%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+154%
|
35−40
−154%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+143%
|
14−16
−143%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+173%
|
14−16
−173%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+350%
|
12−14
−350%
|
| World of Tanks | 180−190
+140%
|
75−80
−140%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+238%
|
12−14
−238%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 25
+150%
|
10−11
−150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+122%
|
21−24
−122%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 57
+200%
|
18−20
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+338%
|
8−9
−338%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+154%
|
35−40
−154%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+350%
|
12−14
−350%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 18
+350%
|
4−5
−350%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| World of Tanks | 95−100
+197%
|
30−35
−197%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+350%
|
6−7
−350%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14
−121%
|
30−35
+121%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+220%
|
10−11
−220%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+433%
|
6−7
−433%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+250%
|
6−7
−250%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+1350%
|
2−3
−1350%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+157%
|
7−8
−157%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+154%
|
12−14
−154%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
+50%
|
16−18
−50%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+50%
|
16−18
−50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+200%
|
12−14
−200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+50%
|
16−18
−50%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+240%
|
5−6
−240%
|
| Fortnite | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
This is how Arc Graphics 140V and UHD Graphics 750 compete in popular games:
- Arc Graphics 140V is 233% faster in 1080p
- Arc Graphics 140V is 233% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc Graphics 140V is 1350% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics 750 is 121% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Arc Graphics 140V is ahead in 51 test (96%)
- UHD Graphics 750 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.43 | 4.51 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 14 nm |
Arc Graphics 140V has a 197.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc Graphics 140V is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 750 in performance tests.
Be aware that Arc Graphics 140V is a notebook card while UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
