Arc A550M vs GeForce 9700M GT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9700M GT and Arc A550M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9700M GT
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 45 Watt
0.78

A550M outperforms 9700M by a whopping 2803% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1203276
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.3328.97
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG96DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 July 2008 (17 years ago)2022 (3 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 cores322048
Core clock speed625 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors314 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate10.00262.4
Floating-point processing power0.0992 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
Gigaflops148no data
ROPs864
TMUs16128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cacheno data3 MB
L2 Cache32 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-IIPCIe 4.0 x16

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 amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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+-
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

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%
Escape from Tarkov 1−2
−8900%
90−95
+8900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−7400%
75−80
+7400%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−1433%
90−95
+1433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1025%
90−95
+1025%
Valorant 30−33
−440%
160−170
+440%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−1105%
250−260
+1105%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%
Dota 2 12−14
−823%
120−130
+823%
Escape from Tarkov 1−2
−8900%
90−95
+8900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−7400%
75−80
+7400%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−1433%
90−95
+1433%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−5000%
50−55
+5000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1025%
90−95
+1025%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−1033%
65−70
+1033%
Valorant 30−33
−440%
160−170
+440%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2400%
50−55
+2400%
Dota 2 12−14
−823%
120−130
+823%
Escape from Tarkov 1−2
−8900%
90−95
+8900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−7400%
75−80
+7400%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−1433%
90−95
+1433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1025%
90−95
+1025%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−1033%
65−70
+1033%
Valorant 30−33
−440%
160−170
+440%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1533%
45−50
+1533%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
−4000%
160−170
+4000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−2075%
170−180
+2075%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 21−24
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−2500%
50−55
+2500%
Far Cry 5 0−1 50−55
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2850%
55−60
+2850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1700%
35−40
+1700%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−207%
40−45
+207%
Valorant 4−5
−3275%
130−140
+3275%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+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%
Escape from Tarkov 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

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

  • in Escape from Tarkov, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A550M is 8900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A550M performs better in 36 tests (58%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (42%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.78 22.64
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 60 Watt

9700M GT has 33.3% lower power consumption.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 2802.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9700M GT in performance tests.

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 9700M GT
GeForce 9700M GT
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M

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 8 votes

Rate GeForce 9700M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 93 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 GeForce 9700M GT or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.