Arc A380 vs Radeon HD 6380G
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6380G with Arc A380, including specs and performance data.
A380 outperforms HD 6380G by a whopping 3029% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1294 | 383 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 38.90 |
| Power efficiency | 1.05 | 15.37 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | SuperSumo | DG2-128 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (14 years ago) | 14 June 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399.99 | $149 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
HD 6380G and Arc A380 have a nearly equal value for money.
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 cores | 160 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2050 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 3.200 | 131.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.128 TFLOPS | 4.198 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 32 |
| TMUs | 8 | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 8 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 4 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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 222 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1937 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 186.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| 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.
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.
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 | 1−2
−4600%
| 47
+4600%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 399.99
−12517%
| 3.17
+12517%
|
- Arc A380 has 12517% lower cost per frame in 1080p
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4000%
|
41
+4000%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−3200%
|
33
+3200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1800%
|
76
+1800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−613%
|
55−60
+613%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−363%
|
120−130
+363%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 16−18
−1163%
|
200−210
+1163%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2800%
|
29
+2800%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−2627%
|
300−310
+2627%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1700%
|
72
+1700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 40 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−613%
|
55−60
+613%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1000%
|
66
+1000%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−363%
|
120−130
+363%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2500%
|
26
+2500%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−2627%
|
300−310
+2627%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1325%
|
57
+1325%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−613%
|
55−60
+613%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−467%
|
34
+467%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−363%
|
120−130
+363%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
−5550%
|
110−120
+5550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−2860%
|
140−150
+2860%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−1450%
|
30−35
+1450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−1750%
|
35−40
+1750%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1000%
|
21−24
+1000%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 30−35 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−100%
|
27−30
+100%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−2700%
|
80−85
+2700%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−650%
|
14−16
+650%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−650%
|
14−16
+650%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 183
+0%
|
183
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 122
+0%
|
122
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 62
+0%
|
62
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 72
+0%
|
72
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 64
+0%
|
64
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 33
+0%
|
33
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 52
+0%
|
52
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
This is how HD 6380G and Arc A380 compete in popular games:
- Arc A380 is 4600% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A380 is 5550% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Arc A380 performs better in 26 tests (44%)
- there's a draw in 33 tests (56%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.48 | 15.02 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 14 June 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 75 Watt |
HD 6380G has 114.3% lower power consumption.
Arc A380, on the other hand, has a 3029.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 433.3% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6380G in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6380G is a notebook graphics card while Arc A380 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
