Arc A550M vs GeForce GTX 960

Place in the ranking	342	227
Place by popularity	53	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.16	no data
Power efficiency	9.09	28.16
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GM206	DG2-512
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	22 January 2015 (9 years ago)	2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data

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 cores	1024	2048
Core clock speed	1127 MHz	900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1178 MHz	2050 MHz
Number of transistors	2,940 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	75.39	262.4
Floating-point processing power	2.413 TFLOPS	8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	64	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).

Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	241 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Recommended system power (PSU)	400 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	7.0 GB/s	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	112 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	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2	Portable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	+	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 960 15.85

Arc A550M 24.55
+54.9%

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 960 7916

Arc A550M 14350
+81.3%

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	62 −53.2%	95−100 +53.2%
4K	30 −50%	45−50 +50%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.21	no data
4K	6.63	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −61.3%	50−55 +61.3%
Elden Ring	45−50 −63.3%	80−85 +63.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −47.1%	75−80 +47.1%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −61.3%	50−55 +61.3%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −64.6%	100−110 +64.6%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −48.8%	60−65 +48.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −42.1%	50−55 +42.1%
Valorant	60−65 −54.7%	95−100 +54.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −47.1%	75−80 +47.1%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −61.3%	50−55 +61.3%
Dota 2	33 −158%	85−90 +158%
Elden Ring	45−50 −63.3%	80−85 +63.3%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −33.3%	75−80 +33.3%
Fortnite	85−90 −40.9%	120−130 +40.9%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −64.6%	100−110 +64.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 −71.4%	80−85 +71.4%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −48.8%	60−65 +48.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −37.2%	150−160 +37.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −42.1%	50−55 +42.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	49 −61.2%	75−80 +61.2%
Valorant	60−65 −54.7%	95−100 +54.7%
World of Tanks	200−210 −27.4%	250−260 +27.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −47.1%	75−80 +47.1%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −61.3%	50−55 +61.3%
Dota 2	55−60 −49.1%	85−90 +49.1%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −33.3%	75−80 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −64.6%	100−110 +64.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −37.2%	150−160 +37.2%
Valorant	60−65 −54.7%	95−100 +54.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	21−24 −78.3%	40−45 +78.3%
Elden Ring	24−27 −72%	40−45 +72%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 −70.8%	40−45 +70.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 −19.9%	170−180 +19.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
World of Tanks	110−120 −48.2%	160−170 +48.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −53.1%	45−50 +53.1%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −50%	21−24 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −75%	21−24 +75%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −82.1%	70−75 +82.1%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −66.7%	65−70 +66.7%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −60%	55−60 +60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −80%	35−40 +80%
Valorant	40−45 −65%	65−70 +65%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −100%	21−24 +100%
Dota 2	27−30 −59.3%	40−45 +59.3%
Elden Ring	10−12 −72.7%	18−20 +72.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −59.3%	40−45 +59.3%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −72.7%	18−20 +72.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −59.6%	75−80 +59.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −55.6%	40−45 +55.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −73.3%	24−27 +73.3%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −100%	21−24 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Dota 2	27−30 −59.3%	40−45 +59.3%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −60%	30−35 +60%
Fortnite	18−20 −66.7%	30−33 +66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −72.7%	35−40 +72.7%
Valorant	18−20 −77.8%	30−35 +77.8%

This is how GTX 960 and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

Arc A550M is 53% faster in 1080p
Arc A550M is 50% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A550M is 158% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Arc A550M surpassed GTX 960 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	15.85	24.55
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	60 Watt

Arc A550M has a 54.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 960 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960 is a desktop card while Arc A550M is a notebook one.

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