Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Quadro NVS 160M

Place in the ranking	1344	494
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.20	no data
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code name	G98	Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	15 August 2008 (17 years ago)	14 December 2023 (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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	8	4
Core clock speed	580 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1950 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	4.640	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.0232 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	4	no data
TMUs	8	no data
L2 Cache	16 KB	no data

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).

Interface

MXM-I

no data

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	no data
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	11.2 GB/s	no data
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 outputs

no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12_2
Shader Model	4.0	no data
OpenGL	3.3	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-
CUDA	1.1	-

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

0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077

1−2

−2600%

27−30
+2600%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −2600%	27−30 +2600%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −1150%	50 +1150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −386%	30−35 +386%
Valorant	24−27 −254%	90−95 +254%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	14−16 −2400%	350−400 +2400%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1900%	20−22 +1900%
Dota 2	10−11 −2600%	270−280 +2600%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −875%	39 +875%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −386%	30−35 +386%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −400%	24−27 +400%
Valorant	24−27 −254%	90−95 +254%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1900%	20−22 +1900%
Dota 2	10−11 −2600%	270−280 +2600%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −650%	30 +650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −386%	30−35 +386%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −2500%	130−140 +2500%
Valorant	24−27 −254%	90−95 +254%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −2567%	80−85 +2567%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	1−2 −7200%	70−75 +7200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −1125%	45−50 +1125%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov	2−3 −2650%	55−60 +2650%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −2200%	21−24 +2200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −42.9%	20−22 +42.9%
Valorant	2−3 −2650%	55−60 +2650%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

−800%

9−10
+800%

4K
Epic

Fortnite

2−3

−2650%

55−60
+2650%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2

+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	11 +0%	11 +0%
Escape from Tarkov	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	13 +0%	13 +0%
Escape from Tarkov	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
Fortnite	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	15 +0%	15 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Fortnite	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
High

Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Escape from Tarkov	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Escape from Tarkov	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Fortnite	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

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

in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 7200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) performs better in 18 tests (31%)
there's a draw in 40 tests (69%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.34	9.38
Recency	15 August 2008	14 December 2023
Chip lithography	65 nm	5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 2658.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is a mobile 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.

Quadro NVS 160M

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

Other comparisons

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

Quadro NVS 160M

Mobility FireGL V5700

Graphics 4 Cores iGPU (Arc)

Graphics 4 Core iGPU (Arc)

M390 Mac Edition

Mobile Graphics

ATI Radeon HD 3450

MX450 30.5W 8Gbps

ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT

4500M

Community ratings

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

3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

2.3 33 votes

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

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 160M or Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.