Arc Pro A50 vs GeForce 800A

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1039not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.72no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGF119DG2-128
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date17 March 2014 (10 years ago)8 August 2022 (2 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 cores481024
Core clock speed475 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2350 MHz
Number of transistors292 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate3.800150.4
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPS4.813 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s192.0 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 March 2014 8 August 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 75 Watt

GeForce 800A has 400% lower power consumption.

Arc Pro A50, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 800A and Arc Pro A50. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 800A is a notebook card while Arc Pro A50 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce 800A
GeForce 800A
Intel Arc Pro A50
Arc Pro A50

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.8 13 votes

Rate GeForce 800A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Arc Pro A50 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.