Arc A550M vs GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
660 OEM 660 Rev. 2 660 Ti 670 680 680 Mac Edition 690 760 760 OEM 760 Ti OEM 760 X2 770
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A350M A370M A380M A530M A550M A570M A730M A770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 760 Ti OEM
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
13.08

A550M outperforms 760 Ti OEM by an impressive 73% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 760 Ti OEM GTX 760 Ti OEM
Arc A550M Arc A550M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking416276
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.9129.00
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGK104DG2-512
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date27 September 2013 (12 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 cores13442048
Core clock speed915 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate109.8262.4
Floating-point processing power2.634 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs112128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cache112 KB3 MB
L2 Cache512 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.3 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA3.0-
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

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+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%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 13.08 22.64
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 60 Watt

Arc A550M has a 73.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM is a desktop graphics card while Arc A550M is a notebook one.

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 760 Ti OEM
GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM
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.

GTX 760 Ti OEM GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM
vs
Radeon 760M Radeon 760M
Arc A550M Arc A550M
vs
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
GTX 760 Ti OEM GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM
vs
Arc A310 Arc A310
GTX 760 X2 GeForce GTX 760 X2
vs
Plex 2200 S4 Plex 2200 S4
GTX 760 X2 GTX 760 X2
vs
GTX 580 Rev. 2 580 Rev. 2
GTX 760 X2 GeForce GTX 760 X2
vs
Arc B580 Arc B580
GT 635 OEM GeForce GT 635 OEM
vs
GRID K560Q GRID K560Q
GTX 760 Ti OEM GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM
vs
UHD Graphics 920 Graphics 920
GTX 780 6 GB GeForce GTX 780 6 GB
vs
Graphics Radeon Graphics
GTX 780 Rev. 2 GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
vs
HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics HD 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics
GTX 780 Rev. 2 GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
vs
ATI HD 3870 HD 3870
GTX 780 Rev. 2 GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
vs
Arc 3 A370M 3 A370M
GTX 780 Rev. 2 GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
vs
Arc B580 Arc B580

Community ratings

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

3.6 95 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM 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 GTX 760 Ti OEM or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.