Arc A370M vs Radeon E8950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
E8950 R9 M295X R9 M295X Mac Edition R9 M390X R9 M395X R9 M395X Mac Edition R9 M485X
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A350M A370M A380M A530M A550M A570M A730M A770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon E8950 and Arc A370M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon E8950
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 95 Watt
13.06
+6.9%

E8950 outperforms A370M by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
Arc A370M Arc A370M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking418438
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.5526.80
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameAmethystDG2-128
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 September 2015 (10 years ago)30 March 2022 (3 years 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 cores20481024
Core clock speed735 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1550 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate128.099.20
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS3.174 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs12864
Ray Tracing Coresno data8
L1 Cache512 KB1.5 MB
L2 Cache512 KB4 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).

InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s112.0 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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 HD40−45
+2.6%
39
−2.6%
1440p21−24
+5%
20
−5%
4K35−40
+2.9%
34
−2.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+0%
37
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Dota 2 68
+0%
68
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+0%
53
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Dota 2 66
+0%
66
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+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 11
+0%
11
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+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%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−12
+0%
10−12
+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 Radeon E8950 and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon E8950 is 3% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon E8950 is 5% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon E8950 is 3% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 13.06 12.22
Recency 29 September 2015 30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

Radeon E8950 has a 6.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Arc A370M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon E8950 and Arc A370M.

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.

AMD Radeon E8950
Radeon E8950
Intel Arc A370M
Arc A370M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Apple M1 8-Core GPU M1 8 Core GPU
Arc A370M Arc A370M
vs
Arc Graphics 140V Arc Graphics 140V
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
R5 A335 R5 A335
vs
Jetson Orin NX 8 GB Jetson Orin NX 8 GB
R5 A335 R5 A335
vs
RTX 5070 Ti RTX 5070 Ti
Radeon E6465 E6465
vs
Arc B580 Arc B580
Radeon E8950 E8950
vs
S4000X S4000X
Radeon E8950 E8950
vs
MX450 N18S-G5 MX450 N18S-G5
R7 M350 R7 M350
vs
210 Rev. 2 210 Rev. 2
R7 M350 R7 M350
vs
UHD Graphics 920 UHD Graphics 920
R7 M350 R7 M350
vs
GT 555M 2 GB GT 555M 2 GB
R7 M350 R7 M350
vs
Radeon 8040S 8040S
R7 M365 R7 M365
vs
RX 580 OEM RX 580 OEM

Community ratings

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

4.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon E8950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 188 votes

Rate Arc A370M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon E8950 or Arc A370M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.