Arc A370M vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5165
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5165 and Arc A370M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
A370M outperforms Mobility HD 5165 by a whopping 1111% 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 | 1156 | 444 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.22 | 26.91 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | M96 | DG2-128 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 30 March 2022 (4 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 | 320 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1550 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 514 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 19.20 | 99.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.384 TFLOPS | 3.174 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32 |
| TMUs | 32 | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 8 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 1.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 4 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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB/s | 112.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
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 | 3−4
−1200%
| 39
+1200%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−1900%
| 20
+1900%
|
| 4K | 2−3
−1600%
| 34
+1600%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2200%
|
46
+2200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1750%
|
37
+1750%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2350%
|
49
+2350%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3500%
|
70−75
+3500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−657%
|
50−55
+657%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−3700%
|
35−40
+3700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−252%
|
100−110
+252%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−600%
|
170−180
+600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1150%
|
25
+1150%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−353%
|
68
+353%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2200%
|
46
+2200%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3500%
|
70−75
+3500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−657%
|
50−55
+657%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−3700%
|
35−40
+3700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−3300%
|
34
+3300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−783%
|
53
+783%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−252%
|
100−110
+252%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−950%
|
21
+950%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−340%
|
66
+340%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−2050%
|
43
+2050%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−657%
|
50−55
+657%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−400%
|
45−50
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−333%
|
26
+333%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−252%
|
100−110
+252%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3500%
|
70−75
+3500%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−500%
|
24−27
+500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−1450%
|
90−95
+1450%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−791%
|
95−100
+791%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2800%
|
29
+2800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−71.4%
|
24−27
+71.4%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−1240%
|
65−70
+1240%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−500%
|
12−14
+500%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−500%
|
12−14
+500%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20
+0%
|
20
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 5165 and Arc A370M compete in popular games:
- Arc A370M is 1200% faster in 1080p
- Arc A370M is 1900% faster in 1440p
- Arc A370M is 1600% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A370M is 3700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Arc A370M performs better in 38 tests (64%)
- there's a draw in 21 tests (36%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.01 | 12.23 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 30 March 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 6 nm |
Arc A370M has a 1111% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 817% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc A370M is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5165 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.
