Arc A550M vs GeForce GT 735M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
710M 805A 810A 825M GT 720M GT 730A GT 735M GT 740A GT 740M
VS
Arc A350M Arc A370M Arc A380M Arc A530M Arc A550M Arc A570M Arc A730M Arc A770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 735M and Arc A550M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 735M
2013
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
1.46

Arc A550M outperforms GT 735M by a whopping 1355% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GT 735M GT 735M
Arc A550M Arc A550M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking952241
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.5128.08
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGK208DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (11 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 cores3842048
Core clock speed575 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed889 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors915 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate18.40262.4
Floating-point processing power0.4416 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs32128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 3.0 x8PCIe 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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3no data
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 outputsPortable Device Dependent
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+-
DLSS-+

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.

GT 735M 1.46
Arc A550M 21.25
+1355%

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 735M 1024
Arc A550M 14350
+1302%

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:

900p17
−1312%
240−250
+1312%
Full HD21
−1329%
300−350
+1329%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1567%
50−55
+1567%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−2300%
45−50
+2300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−2967%
90−95
+2967%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1567%
50−55
+1567%
Far Cry 5 0−1 75−80
Fortnite 6−7
−1833%
110−120
+1833%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1050%
90−95
+1050%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 70−75
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−2300%
45−50
+2300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Valorant 35−40
−347%
160−170
+347%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−2967%
90−95
+2967%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 32
−688%
250−260
+688%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1567%
50−55
+1567%
Dota 2 18−20
−532%
120−130
+532%
Far Cry 5 0−1 75−80
Fortnite 6−7
−1833%
110−120
+1833%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1050%
90−95
+1050%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 70−75
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−2300%
45−50
+2300%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−1050%
65−70
+1050%
Valorant 35−40
−347%
160−170
+347%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−2967%
90−95
+2967%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1567%
50−55
+1567%
Dota 2 18−20
−532%
120−130
+532%
Far Cry 5 0−1 75−80
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1050%
90−95
+1050%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−2300%
45−50
+2300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−1050%
65−70
+1050%
Valorant 35−40
−347%
160−170
+347%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
−1833%
110−120
+1833%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−5000%
50−55
+5000%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−11
−1540%
160−170
+1540%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−1060%
170−180
+1060%
Valorant 9−10
−2122%
200−210
+2122%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−2550%
50−55
+2550%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1400%
60−65
+1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 24−27
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1850%
35−40
+1850%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−1733%
55−60
+1733%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−187%
40−45
+187%
Valorant 8−9
−1575%
130−140
+1575%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 10−11
Dota 2 2−3
−3700%
75−80
+3700%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−733%
24−27
+733%

Full HD
Low Preset

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

Full HD
Medium Preset

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

Full HD
High Preset

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

1440p
High Preset

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

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how GT 735M and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A550M is 1312% faster in 900p
  • Arc A550M is 1329% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A550M is 5000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A550M is ahead in 45 tests (76%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.46 21.25
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 60 Watt

GT 735M has 81.8% lower power consumption.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 1355.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 735M 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 GT 735M
GeForce GT 735M
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GT 735M GeForce GT 735M
vs
GT 555M GeForce GT 555M
Arc A550M Arc A550M
vs
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
GT 735M GeForce GT 735M
vs
R7 M340 Radeon R7 M340
Pro Vega 56 Radeon Pro Vega 56
vs
Quadro P2200 Quadro P2200
Quadro P620 Quadro P620
vs
RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation
P104-101 P104 101
vs
Radeon 780M Radeon 780M
RX Vega 11 Radeon RX Vega 11
vs
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
RX Vega 11 Radeon RX Vega 11
vs
Pro W6400 Pro W6400
RX Vega 11 Radeon RX Vega 11
vs
GT 630M GT 630M
RX Vega 11 Radeon RX Vega 11
vs
HD 7850M HD 7850M
UHD Graphics 605 UHD Graphics 605
vs
Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Xe Graphics 80EU
GTX 1070 Ti GeForce GTX 1070 Ti
vs
Pro 5300M Pro 5300M
UHD Graphics 630 UHD Graphics 630
vs
530 Mobile DDR3 Radeon 530 Mobile DDR3

Community ratings

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

3.7 34 votes

Rate GeForce GT 735M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 81 vote

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 GT 735M or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.