Arc A770 vs GeForce 800M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 800M with Arc A770, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 800M
2014
1 GB DDR3, 15 Watt
1.14

A770 outperforms 800M by a whopping 2701% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1119193
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data50.20
Power efficiency5.8510.93
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGF117DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date17 March 2014 (12 years ago)12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

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 cores484096
Core clock speed738 MHz2100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors585 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate5.904614.4
Floating-point processing power0.1417 TFLOPS19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs8128
TMUs8256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L1 Cache64 KBno data
L2 Cache128 KB16 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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB16 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.1-
DLSS-+

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.

GeForce 800M 1.14
Arc A770 31.93
+2701%

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.

GeForce 800M 477
Samples: 28
Arc A770 13343
+2697%
Samples: 1674

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 HD3−4
−3467%
107
+3467%
1440p2−3
−3050%
63
+3050%
4K1−2
−3800%
39
+3800%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.07
1440pno data5.22
4Kno data8.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 317
+0%
317
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 166
+0%
166
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270
+0%
270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70
+0%
70
+0%
Far Cry 5 117
+0%
117
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 139
+0%
139
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 143
+0%
143
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 127
+0%
127
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 105
+0%
105
+0%
Metro Exodus 113
+0%
113
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 196
+0%
196
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+0%
72
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Far Cry 5 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+0%
48
+0%
Metro Exodus 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+0%
73
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8
+0%
8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how GeForce 800M and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770 is 3467% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770 is 3050% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770 is 3800% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.14 31.93
Recency 17 March 2014 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 225 Watt

GeForce 800M has 1400% lower power consumption.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has a 2701% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 367% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 800M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 800M is a notebook graphics card while Arc A770 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.

Community ratings

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


3 80 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5514 votes

Rate Arc A770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 800M or Arc A770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.