Arc Graphics 140V vs Quadro RTX 5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 5000 with Arc Graphics 140V, including specs and performance data.

RTX 5000
2018, $2,299
16 GB GDDR6, 230 Watt
36.70
+198%

RTX 5000 outperforms Graphics 140V by a whopping 198% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking145443
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.84no data
Power efficiency12.29no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Xe² (2024)
GPU code nameTU104Lunar Lake iGPU
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 August 2018 (7 years ago)24 September 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,299 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 cores30728
Core clock speed1620 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1815 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Wattno data
Texture fill rate348.5no data
Floating-point processing power11.15 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs192no data
Tensor Cores384no data
Ray Tracing Cores48no data
L1 Cache3 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MBno 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeGDDR6LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount16 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1750 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth448.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort, 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_1)12_2
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
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 5000 36.70
+198%
Arc Graphics 140V 12.30

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 5000 15347
+198%
Samples: 1080
Arc Graphics 140V 5142
Samples: 3154

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 HD110−120
+182%
39
−182%
1440p75−80
+188%
26
−188%
4K60−65
+186%
21
−186%

Cost per frame, $

1080p20.90no data
1440p30.65no data
4K38.32no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 47
+0%
47
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85
+0%
85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 42
+0%
42
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+0%
62
+0%
Valorant 137
+0%
137
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
+0%
18
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 114
+0%
114
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 37
+0%
37
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+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%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how RTX 5000 and Arc Graphics 140V compete in popular games:

  • RTX 5000 is 182% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 5000 is 188% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 5000 is 186% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 36.70 12.30
Recency 13 August 2018 24 September 2024
Chip lithography 12 nm 3 nm

RTX 5000 has a 198.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc Graphics 140V, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc Graphics 140V in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 5000 is a workstation graphics card while Arc Graphics 140V 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 5000
Quadro RTX 5000
Intel Arc Graphics 140V
Arc Graphics 140V

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.


3.6 246 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 87 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 5000 or Arc Graphics 140V, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.