Arc A370M vs FirePro R5000

Place in performance ranking	529	317
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.05	no data
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)	Xe HPG (2020−2022)
GPU code name	Pitcairn	Alchemist
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	25 February 2013 (11 years ago)	30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,099	no data
Current price	$500 (0.5x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	768	8
Core clock speed	825 MHz	1550 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1550 MHz
Number of transistors	2,800 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	350 Watt	50 Watt (35 - 50 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	39.60	99.20
Floating-point performance	1,267 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on FirePro R5000 and Arc A370M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	279 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Form factor	full height / full length	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data

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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	3200 MHz	14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	102.4 GB/s	96 GB/s
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	2x mini-DisplayPort	No outputs
Dual-link DVI support	1	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

FirePro R5000 6.85

Arc A370M 15.79
+131%

Arc A370M outperforms FirePro R5000 by 131% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FirePro R5000 2646

Arc A370M 5115
+93.3%

Arc A370M outperforms FirePro R5000 by 93% in Passmark.

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	16−18 −138%	38 +138%
1440p	8−9 −150%	20 +150%
4K	16−18 −150%	40 +150%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

18−20

−156%

46
+156%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −136%	33 +136%
Battlefield 5	21−24 −143%	50−55 +143%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −131%	37 +131%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −131%	35−40 +131%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 −139%	40−45 +139%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −147%	70−75 +147%
Hitman 3	12−14 −158%	30−35 +158%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −133%	60−65 +133%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −152%	50−55 +152%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −144%	40−45 +144%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −147%	74 +147%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 −150%	45 +150%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −150%	20 +150%
Battlefield 5	21−24 −143%	50−55 +143%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −150%	25 +150%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −131%	35−40 +131%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 −139%	40−45 +139%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −147%	70−75 +147%
Hitman 3	12−14 −158%	30−35 +158%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −133%	60−65 +133%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −152%	50−55 +152%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −144%	40−45 +144%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 −158%	62 +158%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −152%	53 +152%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 −157%	18 +157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −133%	21 +133%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −131%	35−40 +131%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −147%	70−75 +147%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −133%	60−65 +133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −152%	53 +152%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −160%	26 +160%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 −150%	15 +150%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

−144%

40−45
+144%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −158%	30−35 +158%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −167%	16−18 +167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −160%	13 +160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −138%	18−20 +138%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −142%	29 +142%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Hitman 3	8−9 −138%	18−20 +138%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −133%	27−30 +133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −131%	37 +131%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −143%	16−18 +143%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −175%	11 +175%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−160%

24−27
+160%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −150%	14−16 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Hitman 3	4−5 −175%	10−12 +175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −143%	16−18 +143%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −150%	14−16 +150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −133%	21−24 +133%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −143%	16−18 +143%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −150%	14−16 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
−133%

14−16

+133%

This is how FirePro R5000 and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

Arc A370M is 138% faster in 1080p
Arc A370M is 150% faster in 1440p
Arc A370M is 150% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.85	15.79
Recency	25 February 2013	30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	350 Watt	50 Watt