RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
2023
10.23

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) by a whopping 343% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking44877
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data88.98
Power efficiencyno data44.49
ArchitectureXe LPG (2023)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameMeteor Lake iGPUAD107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date14 December 2023 (1 year ago)12 February 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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 cores42816
Core clock speedno data1620 MHz
Boost clock speed1950 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data187.4
Floating-point processing powerno data12 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data88
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data16 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 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 Connectorsno data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

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 HD25
−340%
110−120
+340%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.90

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 13
−323%
55−60
+323%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−329%
180−190
+329%
Counter-Strike 2 11
−309%
45−50
+309%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−338%
140−150
+338%
Forza Horizon 4 50
−340%
220−230
+340%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
−340%
110−120
+340%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−341%
150−160
+341%
Valorant 90−95
−335%
400−450
+335%
Atomic Heart 16
−338%
70−75
+338%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−329%
180−190
+329%
Counter-Strike 2 13
−323%
55−60
+323%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
−325%
85−90
+325%
Far Cry 5 24
−317%
100−105
+317%
Fortnite 55−60
−339%
250−260
+339%
Forza Horizon 4 39
−336%
170−180
+336%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
−340%
110−120
+340%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
−333%
65−70
+333%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−321%
80−85
+321%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−341%
150−160
+341%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−340%
110−120
+340%
Valorant 90−95
−335%
400−450
+335%
Atomic Heart 24−27
−317%
100−105
+317%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−329%
180−190
+329%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
−317%
75−80
+317%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
−325%
85−90
+325%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−338%
140−150
+338%
Fortnite 55−60
−339%
250−260
+339%
Forza Horizon 4 30
−333%
130−140
+333%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
−340%
110−120
+340%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−341%
150−160
+341%
Valorant 90−95
−335%
400−450
+335%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−311%
300−310
+311%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−329%
60−65
+329%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−309%
45−50
+309%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
−339%
290−300
+339%
Battlefield 5 24−27
−317%
100−105
+317%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−317%
50−55
+317%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−325%
85−90
+325%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−335%
100−105
+335%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
−341%
75−80
+341%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−333%
65−70
+333%
Valorant 100−110
−321%
450−500
+321%
Atomic Heart 14−16
−329%
60−65
+329%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
−325%
85−90
+325%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−309%
45−50
+309%
Atomic Heart 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−317%
50−55
+317%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Fortnite 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−338%
70−75
+338%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Valorant 50−55
−340%
220−230
+340%

This is how Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 340% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.23 45.33
Recency 14 December 2023 12 February 2024

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 343.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 month.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) in performance tests.

Be aware that Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is a notebook card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation 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.


Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

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


2.1
10 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1
29 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) or RTX 2000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.