Arc A380 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q with Arc A380, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1050 Max-Q
2018
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
10.52

Arc A380 outperforms GTX 1050 Max-Q by an impressive 53% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking434333
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data44.08
Power efficiency9.6214.75
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGP107DG2-128
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 January 2018 (6 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 cores6401024
Core clock speed1190 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed1328 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate53.12131.2
Floating-point processing power1.7 TFLOPS4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4064
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data222 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.1 GB/s186.0 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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA6.1-

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.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 10.52
Arc A380 16.13
+53.3%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Ice Storm GPU
    • Unigine Heaven 3.0

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.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 4052
Arc A380 6211
+53.3%

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.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 7154
Arc A380 13892
+94.2%

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.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 26081
Arc A380 53979
+107%

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.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 5650
Arc A380 10174
+80.1%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 35392
Arc A380 60804
+71.8%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 318811
Arc A380 466666
+46.4%

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GTX 1050 Max-Q 70
Arc A380 53979
+76793%

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 HD45
−4.4%
47
+4.4%
1440p27
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
4K14
−50%
21−24
+50%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.17
1440pno data3.73
4Kno data7.10

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−50%
24−27
+50%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 37
−64.9%
61
+64.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−213%
50
+213%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−194%
95−100
+194%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 31
−96.8%
60−65
+96.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−50%
24−27
+50%
Far Cry 5 37
−81.1%
65−70
+81.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−162%
75−80
+162%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−134%
160−170
+134%
Hitman 3 20−22
−210%
60−65
+210%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−132%
130−140
+132%
Metro Exodus 44
−130%
100−110
+130%
Red Dead Redemption 2 44
−70.5%
75−80
+70.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 63
−63.5%
100−110
+63.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−73.8%
110−120
+73.8%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−188%
72
+188%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−131%
37
+131%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−194%
95−100
+194%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 29
−110%
60−65
+110%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−50%
24−27
+50%
Far Cry 5 30
−123%
65−70
+123%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−162%
75−80
+162%
Forza Horizon 4 97
−69.1%
160−170
+69.1%
Hitman 3 20−22
−210%
60−65
+210%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−132%
130−140
+132%
Metro Exodus 35
−189%
100−110
+189%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30
−150%
75−80
+150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−135%
80
+135%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−125%
60−65
+125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−73.8%
110−120
+73.8%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16
−81.3%
29
+81.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−93.8%
31
+93.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 19
−221%
60−65
+221%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−50%
24−27
+50%
Far Cry 5 22
−205%
65−70
+205%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+22.8%
57
−22.8%
Hitman 3 20−22
−210%
60−65
+210%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+9.6%
52
−9.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−79.4%
61
+79.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
−61.9%
34
+61.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+160%
25
−160%
Red Dead Redemption 2 31
−142%
75−80
+142%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−167%
55−60
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10
−210%
30−35
+210%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−343%
30−35
+343%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 11
−209%
30−35
+209%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−183%
30−35
+183%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−256%
170−180
+256%
Hitman 3 14−16
−157%
35−40
+157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−182%
60−65
+182%
Metro Exodus 24
−138%
55−60
+138%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−353%
65−70
+353%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−290%
35−40
+290%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−139%
160−170
+139%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20
−150%
50−55
+150%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−190%
27−30
+190%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Hitman 3 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−217%
140−150
+217%
Metro Exodus 13
−169%
35−40
+169%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−162%
30−35
+162%
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6
−217%
18−20
+217%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−240%
16−18
+240%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6
−200%
18−20
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 6
−183%
16−18
+183%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−375%
35−40
+375%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−250%
14−16
+250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10
−160%
24−27
+160%

This is how GTX 1050 Max-Q and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A380 is 4% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A380 is 48% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A380 is 50% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1050 Max-Q is 160% faster.
  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A380 is 375% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 Max-Q is ahead in 3 tests (5%)
  • Arc A380 is ahead in 63 tests (95%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.52 16.13
Recency 3 January 2018 14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm

Arc A380 has a 53.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q 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.

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 GTX 1050 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

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.


2.8
251 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5
845 votes

Rate Arc A380 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.