Arc Graphics 140T vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with Arc Graphics 140T, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018, $899
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
35.51
+165%

RTX 4000 outperforms Graphics 140T by a whopping 165% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking155409
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.85no data
Power efficiency17.12no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Xe+ (2025)
GPU code nameTU104no data
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 November 2018 (7 years ago)6 January 2025 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores23048
Core clock speed1005 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1545 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,600 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)160 Wattno data
Texture fill rate222.5no data
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs144no data
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no data
L1 Cache2.3 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MB8 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1625 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/sno data
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 Connectors3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-Cno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)no data
Shader Model6.8no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

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.

RTX 4000 35.51
+165%
Arc Graphics 140T 13.41

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.

RTX 4000 14922
+165%
Samples: 2118
Arc Graphics 140T 5634
Samples: 7

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 HD120−130
+161%
46
−161%
1440p40−45
+150%
16
−150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.49no data
1440p22.48no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 48
+0%
48
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12
+0%
12
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how RTX 4000 and Arc Graphics 140T compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 is 161% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 is 150% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.51 13.41
Recency 13 November 2018 6 January 2025

RTX 4000 has a 164.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc Graphics 140T, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc Graphics 140T in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Arc Graphics 140T is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000
Quadro RTX 4000
Intel Arc Graphics 140T
Arc Graphics 140T

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.


3.6 522 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 31 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or Arc Graphics 140T, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.