Arc A770 vs GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 640 GT 740 GTX 650 GTX 650 Ti GTX 660 GTX 660 Ti GTX 670 GTX 680 GTX 760 GTX 770 GTX 780 GTX 780 Ti
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
5 A550M 7 A730M 7 A770M 7 A780 A580 A750 A770

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK and Arc A770, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX TITAN BLACK
2014, $999
6 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
21.94

A770 outperforms TITAN BLACK by a considerable 45% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX TITAN BLACK GTX TITAN BLACK
Arc A770 Arc A770

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking289191
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.6251.27
Power efficiency6.7410.88
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGK110BDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date18 February 2014 (11 years ago)12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

Arc A770 has 1316% better value for money than GTX TITAN BLACK.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores28804096
Core clock speed889 MHz2100 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate235.2614.4
Floating-point processing power5.645 TFLOPS19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs48128
TMUs240256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L1 Cache240 KBno data
L2 Cache1536 KB16 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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 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 amount6 GB16 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth336 GB/s512.0 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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
3D Vision Live+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+-
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GTX TITAN BLACK 21.94
Arc A770 31.86
+45.2%

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 TITAN BLACK 9177
Samples: 445
Arc A770 13323
+45.2%
Samples: 1513

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 TITAN BLACK 11690
Arc A770 30008
+157%

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 HD70−75
−52.9%
107
+52.9%
1440p40−45
−57.5%
63
+57.5%
4K24−27
−62.5%
39
+62.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p14.27
−364%
3.07
+364%
1440p24.98
−378%
5.22
+378%
4K41.63
−393%
8.44
+393%
  • Arc A770 has 364% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • Arc A770 has 378% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • Arc A770 has 393% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 317
+0%
317
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270
+0%
270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70
+0%
70
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 117
+0%
117
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 139
+0%
139
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 143
+0%
143
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 61
+0%
61
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 127
+0%
127
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 105
+0%
105
+0%
Metro Exodus 113
+0%
113
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 196
+0%
196
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+0%
72
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+0%
48
+0%
Metro Exodus 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+0%
73
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8
+0%
8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

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

  • Arc A770 is 53% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770 is 58% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770 is 63% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 21.94 31.86
Recency 18 February 2014 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 225 Watt

Arc A770 has a 45.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 11.1% lower power consumption.

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

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 TITAN BLACK
GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK
Intel Arc A770
Arc A770
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 TITAN BLACK GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK
vs
GTX 1060 5 GB GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB
Arc A770 Arc A770
vs
RX 5600 XT Radeon RX 5600 XT
GTX TITAN BLACK GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK
vs
RX 5500 XT Radeon RX 5500 XT
GTX 750 GTX 750
vs
GT 415 OEM GT 415 OEM
GTX 750 GTX 750
vs
R4 Mobile Graphics R4 Mobile Graphics
GTX 750 GTX 750
vs
R4E Mobile Graphics R4E Mobile Graphics
GTX 750 750
vs
RTX 4070 GDDR6 4070 GDDR6
GTX TITAN BLACK TITAN BLACK
vs
GTX 670 670
GTX 650 GTX 650
vs
8800M GTX 8800M GTX
GTX 650 GTX 650
vs
GTS 150M GTS 150M
GTX 650 GTX 650
vs
GT 220 GT 220
GTX 650 GTX 650
vs
GeForce 705M 705M
GTX 650 650
vs
GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand 760 Ti OEM Rebrand

Community ratings

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

4 112 votes

Rate GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5481 votes

Rate Arc A770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK or Arc A770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.