Arc Graphics 140T vs FirePro W9000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W9000 with Arc Graphics 140T, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W9000
2012, $3,999
6 GB GDDR5, 350 Watt
14.69
+9.1%

W9000 outperforms Graphics 140T by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking395414
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.40no data
Power efficiency4.12no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Xe+ (2025)
GPU code nameTahitino data
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date14 June 2012 (13 years ago)6 January 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores20488
Core clock speed975 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)350 Wattno data
Texture fill rate124.8no data
Floating-point processing power3.994 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs128no data
L1 Cache512 KBno data
L2 Cache768 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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount6 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1375 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth264 GB/sno data
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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDIno data
StereoOutput3D+-
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)no data
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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.

FirePro W9000 14.69
+9.1%
Arc Graphics 140T 13.47

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.

FirePro W9000 6144
+9.1%
Samples: 16
Arc Graphics 140T 5634
Samples: 7

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 HD45−50
+0%
45
+0%
1440p18−21
−5.6%
19
+5.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p88.87no data
1440p222.17no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 48
+0%
48
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58
+0%
58
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12
+0%
12
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how FirePro W9000 and Arc Graphics 140T compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • Arc Graphics 140T is 6% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.69 13.47
Recency 14 June 2012 6 January 2025

FirePro W9000 has a 9.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc Graphics 140T, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FirePro W9000 and Arc Graphics 140T.

Be aware that FirePro W9000 is a workstation graphics card while Arc Graphics 140T is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro W9000
FirePro W9000
Intel Arc Graphics 140T
Arc Graphics 140T

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


3.4 5 votes

Rate FirePro W9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 36 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W9000 or Arc Graphics 140T, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.