Arc A550M vs GeForce GTX 780M

Place in the ranking	457	228
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.62	28.26
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GK104	DG2-512
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	11 May 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 cores	1536	2048
Core clock speed	823 MHz	900 MHz
Boost clock speed	797 MHz	2050 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	122 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	102.0	262.4
Floating-point processing power	2.448 TFLOPS	8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	128	128
Tensor Cores	no data	256
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	16

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 3.0, PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	224.0 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	Portable Device Dependent
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no 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 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	1.1.126	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 780M 9.94

Arc A550M 24.59
+147%

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 780M 5244

Arc A550M 14350
+174%

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

−146%

160−170
+146%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 −150%	50−55 +150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 −150%	50−55 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −170%	100−110 +170%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −160%	65−70 +160%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −108%	50−55 +108%
Valorant	35−40 −161%	95−100 +161%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 −150%	50−55 +150%
Dota 2	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −85.4%	75−80 +85.4%
Fortnite	55−60 −114%	120−130 +114%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −170%	100−110 +170%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −160%	65−70 +160%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −133%	80−85 +133%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 −101%	150−160 +101%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −108%	50−55 +108%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	34 −135%	80−85 +135%
Valorant	35−40 −161%	95−100 +161%
World of Tanks	191 −34%	250−260 +34%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 −150%	50−55 +150%
Dota 2	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −85.4%	75−80 +85.4%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −170%	100−110 +170%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −160%	65−70 +160%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 −101%	150−160 +101%
Valorant	35−40 −161%	95−100 +161%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	12−14 −215%	40−45 +215%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 −223%	40−45 +223%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −272%	170−180 +272%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −188%	21−24 +188%
World of Tanks	70−75 −130%	160−170 +130%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −163%	50−55 +163%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −163%	21−24 +163%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −238%	70−75 +238%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −195%	65−70 +195%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 −160%	35−40 +160%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −195%	55−60 +195%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −177%	35−40 +177%
Valorant	24−27 −164%	65−70 +164%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −450%	21−24 +450%
Dota 2	20−22 −115%	40−45 +115%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 −115%	40−45 +115%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −280%	18−20 +280%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −159%	75−80 +159%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −167%	16−18 +167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −110%	40−45 +110%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −189%	24−27 +189%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −450%	21−24 +450%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Dota 2	20−22 −115%	40−45 +115%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −175%	30−35 +175%
Fortnite	10−11 −210%	30−35 +210%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −192%	35−40 +192%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 −200%	21−24 +200%
Valorant	10−11 −220%	30−35 +220%

This is how GTX 780M and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

Arc A550M is 146% faster in 1080p

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A550M is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Arc A550M is ahead in 63 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.94	24.59
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	122 Watt	60 Watt

Arc A550M has a 147.4% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 103.3% lower power consumption.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 780M in performance tests.

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