Radeon RX 6750 GRE 10 GB vs Arc Pro A30M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc Pro A30M with Radeon RX 6750 GRE 10 GB, including specs and performance data.
6750 GRE 10 GB outperforms Pro A30M by a whopping 224% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 406 | 92 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 88.08 |
| Power efficiency | 21.59 | 20.56 |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | DG2-128 | Navi 22 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 8 August 2022 (3 years ago) | 17 October 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $309 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 1024 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1941 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2000 MHz | 2450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,200 million | 17,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 170 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 | 352.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.096 TFLOPS | 11.29 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 |
| TMUs | 64 | 144 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 8 | 36 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 576 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 3 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 80 MB |
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 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | 4 GB | 10 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 160 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 320.0 GB/s |
| 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 | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
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 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
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.
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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
−213%
|
250−260
+213%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
−217%
|
95−100
+217%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 30−33
−217%
|
95−100
+217%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
−223%
|
200−210
+223%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
−213%
|
250−260
+213%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
−217%
|
95−100
+217%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−219%
|
150−160
+219%
|
| Fortnite | 80−85
−221%
|
260−270
+221%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
−217%
|
190−200
+217%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 40−45
−218%
|
140−150
+218%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
−208%
|
160−170
+208%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
−194%
|
350−400
+194%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
−223%
|
200−210
+223%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
−213%
|
250−260
+213%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 190−200
−211%
|
600−650
+211%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
−217%
|
95−100
+217%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−219%
|
150−160
+219%
|
| Fortnite | 80−85
−221%
|
260−270
+221%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
−217%
|
190−200
+217%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 40−45
−218%
|
140−150
+218%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 50−55
−215%
|
170−180
+215%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−33
−217%
|
95−100
+217%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
−208%
|
160−170
+208%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
−216%
|
120−130
+216%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
−194%
|
350−400
+194%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
−223%
|
200−210
+223%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
−217%
|
95−100
+217%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−219%
|
150−160
+219%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
−217%
|
190−200
+217%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
−208%
|
160−170
+208%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
−216%
|
120−130
+216%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 80−85
−221%
|
260−270
+221%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
−215%
|
85−90
+215%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 100−110
−183%
|
300−310
+183%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
−204%
|
70−75
+204%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
−224%
|
55−60
+224%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
−206%
|
450−500
+206%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−200%
|
120−130
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
−192%
|
35−40
+192%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
−223%
|
100−105
+223%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−214%
|
110−120
+214%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−210%
|
65−70
+210%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 30−35
−213%
|
100−105
+213%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−200%
|
30−33
+200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
−215%
|
85−90
+215%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−200%
|
30−33
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
−216%
|
60−65
+216%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−221%
|
250−260
+221%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−200%
|
60−65
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−200%
|
45−50
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
−220%
|
80−85
+220%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 14.02 | 45.40 |
| Recency | 8 August 2022 | 17 October 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 10 GB |
| Chip lithography | 6 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 170 Watt |
Arc Pro A30M has a 17% more advanced lithography process, and 240% lower power consumption.
RX 6750 GRE 10 GB, on the other hand, has a 224% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 150% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The Radeon RX 6750 GRE 10 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc Pro A30M in performance tests.
Be aware that Arc Pro A30M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6750 GRE 10 GB is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
