Arc A380 vs GeForce GT 635M

Place in the ranking	996	332
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	43.78
Power efficiency	3.04	15.78
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GF116	DG2-128
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	22 March 2012 (12 years ago)	14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	144	1024
CUDA cores	Up to 144	no data
Core clock speed	Up to 675 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	753 MHz	2050 MHz
Number of transistors	1,170 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	16.20	131.2
Floating-point processing power	0.3888 TFLOPS	4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	24	64
Tensor Cores	no data	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	8

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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	222 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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 type	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	Up to 192bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 43.2 GB/s	186.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	+	+
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	Up to 2048x1536	no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray	+	-
Optimus	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
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.

GT 635M 1.45

Arc A380 16.11
+1011%

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.

GT 635M 559

Arc A380 6215
+1012%

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.

GT 635M 4995

Arc A380 53979
+981%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 635M 1110

Arc A380 13892
+1152%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 635M 750

Arc A380 10174
+1257%

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 HD

−88.5%

49
+88.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−900%

40−45
+900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −917%	61 +917%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1425%	60−65 +1425%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −3250%	65−70 +3250%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −4000%	160−170 +4000%
Hitman 3	6−7 −933%	60−65 +933%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −780%	130−140 +780%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −3650%	75−80 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −1188%	100−110 +1188%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −242%	110−120 +242%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −1100%	72 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1425%	60−65 +1425%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −3250%	65−70 +3250%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −2433%	75−80 +2433%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −4000%	160−170 +4000%
Hitman 3	6−7 −933%	60−65 +933%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −780%	130−140 +780%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −3650%	75−80 +3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −900%	80 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −473%	60−65 +473%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −242%	110−120 +242%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −383%	29 +383%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1425%	60−65 +1425%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −3250%	65−70 +3250%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −1325%	57 +1325%
Hitman 3	6−7 −933%	60−65 +933%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −247%	52 +247%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −663%	61 +663%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −209%	34 +209%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +32%	25 −32%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−3650%

75−80
+3650%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −2700%	55−60 +2700%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −2150%	45−50 +2150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −3000%	30−35 +3000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	30−35
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −1600%	30−35 +1600%
Hitman 3	7−8 −414%	35−40 +414%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −1140%	60−65 +1140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −3800%	35−40 +3800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −2186%	160−170 +2186%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−1150%

50−55
+1150%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−2300%

24−27
+2300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1800%	18−20 +1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1600%	16−18 +1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	18−20
Far Cry 5	0−1	16−18

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−767%

24−27
+767%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50 +0%	50 +0%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	37 +0%	37 +0%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Hitman 3	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

This is how GT 635M and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

Arc A380 is 88% faster in 1080p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 635M is 32% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A380 is 4000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 635M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
Arc A380 is ahead in 43 tests (68%)
there's a draw in 19 tests (30%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.45	16.11
Recency	22 March 2012	14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	75 Watt

GT 635M has 114.3% lower power consumption.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has a 1011% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 635M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 635M is a notebook card while Arc A380 is a desktop one.

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