Arc A530M vs Qualcomm Adreno 690

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 690 and Arc A530M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm Adreno 690
2018
7 Watt
2.73

Arc A530M outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by a whopping 576% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking812310
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency26.7919.49
Architectureno dataGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameno dataDG2-256
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)1 August 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 coresno data1536
Core clock speedno data900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistorsno data11,500 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rateno data124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.994 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data96
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data224.0 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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
DLSS-+

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.73
Arc A530M 18.45
+576%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 1050
Arc A530M 7110
+577%

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 HD22
−536%
140−150
+536%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−620%
35−40
+620%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−813%
70−75
+813%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−620%
35−40
+620%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−1080%
55−60
+1080%
Fortnite 12−14
−623%
90−95
+623%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−446%
70−75
+446%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−1100%
45−50
+1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−442%
65−70
+442%
Valorant 40−45
−205%
130−140
+205%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−813%
70−75
+813%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
−345%
210−220
+345%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−620%
35−40
+620%
Dota 2 43
−574%
290−300
+574%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−1080%
55−60
+1080%
Fortnite 12−14
−623%
90−95
+623%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−446%
70−75
+446%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−1100%
45−50
+1100%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
−829%
65−70
+829%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−825%
35−40
+825%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−442%
65−70
+442%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
−153%
45−50
+153%
Valorant 40−45
−205%
130−140
+205%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−813%
70−75
+813%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−620%
35−40
+620%
Dota 2 35
−557%
230−240
+557%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−1080%
55−60
+1080%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−446%
70−75
+446%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−1100%
45−50
+1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−442%
65−70
+442%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−433%
45−50
+433%
Valorant 40−45
−205%
130−140
+205%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
−623%
90−95
+623%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−606%
120−130
+606%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Metro Exodus 0−1 21−24
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
−774%
160−170
+774%
Valorant 21−24
−635%
160−170
+635%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−875%
35−40
+875%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−617%
40−45
+617%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−1450%
30−35
+1450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−600%
27−30
+600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
−680%
35−40
+680%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−107%
30−35
+107%
Valorant 12−14
−646%
95−100
+646%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
Dota 2 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−533%
18−20
+533%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 14−16
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how Qualcomm Adreno 690 and Arc A530M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A530M is 536% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A530M is 2900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A530M is ahead in 56 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 6 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.73 18.45
Recency 6 December 2018 1 August 2023
Chip lithography 5 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 65 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 690 has a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 828.6% lower power consumption.

Arc A530M, on the other hand, has a 575.8% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 years.

The Arc A530M is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

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.


Qualcomm Adreno 690
Adreno 690
Intel Arc A530M
Arc A530M

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.


2.5 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 204 votes

Rate Arc A530M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm Adreno 690 or Arc A530M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.