Arc A550M vs FirePro V7900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A300 A320 V5900 V7900 V7900 SDI
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A350M A370M A380M A530M A550M A570M A730M A770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro V7900 with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

FirePro V7900
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 151 Watt
5.40

A550M outperforms V7900 by a whopping 318% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
Arc A550M Arc A550M

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking663282
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.7728.98
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameCaymanDG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date24 May 2011 (14 years ago)2022 (4 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 cores12802048
Core clock speed725 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)151 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate58.00262.4
Floating-point processing power1.856 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs80128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cache320 KB3 MB
L2 Cache512 KB8 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).

Bus supportPCIe 2.1 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length279 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
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 Connectors4x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3
DLSS-+

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 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 5.40 22.58
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 151 Watt 60 Watt

Arc A550M has a 318% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 567% more advanced lithography process, and 152% lower power consumption.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V7900 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro V7900 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A550M is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
vs
Quadro K620 Quadro K620
Arc A550M Arc A550M
vs
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
FirePro V7900 FirePro V7900
vs
GRID M60-4A GRID M60-4A
FirePro V5900 AMD FirePro V5900
vs
Arc A570M Arc A570M
FirePro V7900 AMD FirePro V7900
vs
GeForce 920MX GeForce 920MX
FirePro V7900 AMD FirePro V7900
vs
R5 A220 R5 A220
FirePro V7900 AMD FirePro V7900
vs
GTX 1650 GTX 1650
FirePro V7900 AMD FirePro V7900
vs
RX Vega 5 RX Vega 5
FirePro V7900 AMD FirePro V7900
vs
RTX 4070 Ti RTX 4070 Ti
FirePro V7900 AMD FirePro V7900
vs
RTX 4060 AD106 RTX 4060 AD106
V7900 SDI AMD FirePro V7900 SDI
vs
ATI HD 3610 HD 3610
V7900 SDI AMD FirePro V7900 SDI
vs
RTX 4090 D RTX 4090 D
FirePro 2270 AMD FirePro 2270
vs
HD 6770 Green Edition HD 6770 Green Edition

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 18 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 102 votes

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro V7900 or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.