Arc A580 vs GeForce 9300M GS

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9300M GS with Arc A580, including specs and performance data.

9300M GS
2008
256 MB GDDR3, 13 Watt
0.26

Arc A580 outperforms 9300M GS by a whopping 11554% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1353182
Place by popularitynot in top-10082
Power efficiency1.4012.08
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG98DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 June 2008 (16 years ago)10 October 2023 (1 year 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 cores83072
Core clock speed550 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors210 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate4.400384.0
Floating-point processing power0.0224 TFLOPS12.29 TFLOPS
Gigaflops34no data
ROPs496
TMUs8192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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).

InterfaceMXM-IPCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

9300M GS 0.26
Arc A580 30.30
+11554%

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.

9300M GS 100
Arc A580 11688
+11588%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

9300M GS 267
Arc A580 95677
+35734%

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 HD0−1105
1440p-0−155
4K-0−133

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−11400%
230−240
+11400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−3333%
103
+3333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4100%
80−85
+4100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−11400%
230−240
+11400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2125%
85−90
+2125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−2038%
170−180
+2038%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−3750%
150−160
+3750%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−371%
130−140
+371%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−3300%
102
+3300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4100%
80−85
+4100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−11400%
230−240
+11400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2125%
85−90
+2125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−2038%
170−180
+2038%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−5250%
214
+5250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−856%
85−90
+856%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−371%
130−140
+371%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−2033%
64
+2033%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4100%
80−85
+4100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−11400%
230−240
+11400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2125%
85−90
+2125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1263%
109
+1263%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−4325%
177
+4325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−656%
68
+656%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−114%
60
+114%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
−817%
55−60
+817%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−4250%
87
+4250%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3500%
70−75
+3500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3400%
35
+3400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 30

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1750%
35−40
+1750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
+0%
85
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 73
+0%
73
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 64
+0%
64
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 87
+0%
87
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+0%
54
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+0%
51
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130
+0%
130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+0%
55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 61
+0%
61
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 56
+0%
56
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 73
+0%
73
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27
+0%
27
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A580 is 5250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is ahead in 25 tests (38%)
  • there's a draw in 40 tests (62%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 30.30
Recency 4 June 2008 10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 175 Watt

9300M GS has 1246.2% lower power consumption.

Arc A580, on the other hand, has a 11553.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9300M GS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9300M GS is a notebook card while Arc A580 is a desktop 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 9300M GS
GeForce 9300M GS
Intel Arc A580
Arc A580

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.


2.3 161 vote

Rate GeForce 9300M GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 260 votes

Rate Arc A580 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.