Arc A770 vs Quadro P5000

Place in the ranking	167	155
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.28	54.18
Power efficiency	12.41	10.33
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GP104	DG2-512
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	1 October 2016 (8 years ago)	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A770 has 763% better value for money than Quadro P5000.

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	2048	4096
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	2100 MHz
Boost clock speed	1733 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	225 Watt
Texture fill rate	277.3	614.4
Floating-point processing power	8.873 TFLOPS	19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	128
TMUs	160	256
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1127 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192 GB/s	512.0 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.4	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Stereo	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	6.1	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Quadro P5000 32.58

Arc A770 33.91
+4.1%

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.

Quadro P5000 12560

Arc A770 13071
+4.1%

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	95 −22.1%	116 +22.1%
1440p	60−65 −8.3%	65 +8.3%
4K	39 −5.1%	41 +5.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	26.31	2.84
1440p	41.65	5.06
4K	64.08	8.02

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

55−60
+31%

40−45

−31%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +7.7%	65 −7.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 −64.3%	92 +64.3%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +23.5%	85−90 −23.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +24.5%	50−55 −24.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +31%	40−45 −31%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +22%	55−60 −22%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +22.4%	65−70 −22.4%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +15.4%	140−150 −15.4%
Hitman 3	65−70 +30.8%	50−55 −30.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +19.5%	110−120 −19.5%
Metro Exodus	100−110 −33.3%	144 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +19.4%	65−70 −19.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +29.5%	85−90 −29.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +12.4%	100−110 −12.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +126%	31 −126%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 −41.1%	79 +41.1%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +23.5%	85−90 −23.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +24.5%	50−55 −24.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +31%	40−45 −31%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +22%	55−60 −22%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +22.4%	65−70 −22.4%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +15.4%	140−150 −15.4%
Hitman 3	65−70 +30.8%	50−55 −30.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +19.5%	110−120 −19.5%
Metro Exodus	100−110 −33.3%	144 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +19.4%	65−70 −19.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 −126%	258 +126%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +21.4%	55−60 −21.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +12.4%	100−110 −12.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70−75 +55.6%	45 −55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 −28.6%	72 +28.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +24.5%	50−55 −24.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +31%	40−45 −31%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +22%	55−60 −22%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +648%	23 −648%
Hitman 3	65−70 +30.8%	50−55 −30.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +16.5%	121 −16.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 −89.5%	216 +89.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	53 −35.8%	72 +35.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +59.5%	74 −59.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

80−85
+19.4%

65−70

−19.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +24.5%	45−50 −24.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +25.6%	35−40 −25.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 −17.6%	40 +17.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 −76.5%	60 +76.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +31%	27−30 −31%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +35.3%	16−18 −35.3%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +23.3%	30−33 −23.3%
Forza Horizon 4	180−190 +25.7%	140−150 −25.7%
Hitman 3	40−45 +29%	30−35 −29%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 −44.9%	100 +44.9%
Metro Exodus	60−65 −49.2%	91 +49.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 −111%	158 +111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −36.4%	60 +36.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	170−180 +17.2%	140−150 −17.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+27.9%

40−45

−27.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +28%	24−27 −28%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +30%	20−22 −30%
Hitman 3	24−27 +30%	20−22 −30%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +20.5%	130−140 −20.5%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −113%	83 +113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	36 −103%	73 +103%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −42.9%	30 +42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 −100%	38 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +450%	8 −450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 −112%	89 +112%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −147%	37 +147%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
+27.3%

21−24

−27.3%

This is how Quadro P5000 and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

Arc A770 is 22% faster in 1080p
Arc A770 is 8% faster in 1440p
Arc A770 is 5% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P5000 is 648% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A770 is 147% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P5000 is ahead in 52 tests (72%)
Arc A770 is ahead in 20 tests (28%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	32.58	33.91
Recency	1 October 2016	12 October 2022
Chip lithography	16 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	225 Watt

Quadro P5000 has 125% lower power consumption.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has a 4.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 166.7% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro P5000 and Arc A770.

Be aware that Quadro P5000 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A770 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.