Radeon 820M vs Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) and Radeon 820M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms 820M by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 501 | 670 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Xe LPG (2023−2025) | RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) |
| GPU code name | Meteor Lake iGPU | Krackan Point |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (2 years ago) | March 2025 (1 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 4 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1950 MHz | 2800 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 22.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.7168 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 2 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 1024 KB |
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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | no data | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | no data | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| Shared memory | + | + |
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 Connectors | no data | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
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.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
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.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
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 | 25
+150%
| 10
−150%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 13
−84.6%
|
24−27
+84.6%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 18−20
+138%
|
8−9
−138%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+95.5%
|
21−24
−95.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 11
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50
+108%
|
24−27
−108%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+75%
|
20−22
−75%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+47.6%
|
60−65
−47.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+95.5%
|
21−24
−95.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 13
−84.6%
|
24−27
+84.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+81.8%
|
10−12
−81.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24
+50%
|
16−18
−50%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+87.1%
|
30−35
−87.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 39
+62.5%
|
24−27
−62.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+100%
|
14−16
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
−6.7%
|
16
+6.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+90%
|
10−11
−90%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+75%
|
20−22
−75%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 22
+83.3%
|
12−14
−83.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+78.6%
|
14−16
−78.6%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+47.6%
|
60−65
−47.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+95.5%
|
21−24
−95.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+92.6%
|
27−30
−92.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+81.8%
|
10−12
−81.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+93.8%
|
16−18
−93.8%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+93.3%
|
30−33
−93.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30
+25%
|
24−27
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−33
+87.5%
|
16−18
−87.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+75%
|
20−22
−75%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 18−20
+90%
|
10−11
−90%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+86%
|
50−55
−86%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+85%
|
40−45
−85%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+85.2%
|
27−30
−85.2%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+300%
|
6−7
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+91.7%
|
12−14
−91.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+94.5%
|
55−60
−94.5%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+129%
|
7−8
−129%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+88.9%
|
27−30
−88.9%
|
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
4K
High
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) and Radeon 820M compete in popular games:
- Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 150% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 450% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 820M is 118% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) performs better in 35 tests (67%)
- Radeon 820M performs better in 4 tests (8%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (25%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.72 | 5.39 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 4 nm |
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 80% higher aggregate performance score.
Radeon 820M, on the other hand, has a 25% more advanced lithography process.
The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 820M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
