Arc A770 vs GeForce GTX 295

Place in the ranking	764	156
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.14	55.44
Power efficiency	0.74	10.46
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GT200B	DG2-512
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	8 January 2009 (16 years ago)	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$500	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

Arc A770 has 39500% better value for money than GTX 295.

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	480	4096
CUDA cores per GPU	240	no data
Core clock speed	576 MHz	2100 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	289 Watt	225 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	46.08	614.4
Floating-point processing power	0.5962 TFLOPS	19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	128
TMUs	80	256
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1792 MB	16 GB
Standard memory config per GPU	896 MB	no data
Memory bus width	896 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	223.8 GB/s	512.0 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPU	448 Bit	no data
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	Two Dual Link DVIHDMI	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)

128bit

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.6
OpenGL	2.1	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.

GTX 295 3.04

Arc A770 33.34
+997%

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 295 1200

Arc A770 13164
+997%

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	10−12 −1020%	112 +1020%
1440p	5−6 −1180%	64 +1180%
4K	3−4 −1267%	41 +1267%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	50.00 −1602%	2.94 +1602%
1440p	100.00 −1845%	5.14 +1845%
4K	166.67 −1977%	8.02 +1977%

Arc A770 has 1602% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Arc A770 has 1845% lower cost per frame in 1440p
Arc A770 has 1977% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	116 +0%	116 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	99 +0%	99 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	304 +0%	304 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Metro Exodus	120 +0%	120 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Valorant	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	88 +0%	88 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Dota 2	105 +0%	105 +0%
Far Cry 5	71 +0%	71 +0%
Fortnite	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	258 +0%	258 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	105 +0%	105 +0%
Metro Exodus	99 +0%	99 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Valorant	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	83 +0%	83 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	216 +0%	216 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Valorant	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45 +0%	45 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +0%	45 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	158 +0%	158 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Metro Exodus	91 +0%	91 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60 +0%	60 +0%
Valorant	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10 +0%	10 +0%
Dota 2	48 +0%	48 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	48 +0%	48 +0%
Metro Exodus	47 +0%	47 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	48 +0%	48 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	15 +0%	15 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Fortnite	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	89 +0%	89 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Valorant	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

This is how GTX 295 and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

Arc A770 is 1020% faster in 1080p
Arc A770 is 1180% faster in 1440p
Arc A770 is 1267% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.04	33.34
Recency	8 January 2009	12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount	1792 MB	16 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	289 Watt	225 Watt

Arc A770 has a 996.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 814.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 816.7% more advanced lithography process, and 28.4% lower power consumption.

The Arc A770 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

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