Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Radeon HD 6670

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6670 with Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

HD 6670
2011, $99
1 GB GDDR5, 66 Watt
1.74

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms HD 6670 by a whopping 444% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking971494
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency2.02no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameTurksMeteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date19 April 2011 (14 years ago)14 December 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 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 cores4804
Boost clock speed800 MHz1950 MHz
Number of transistors716 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)66 Wattno data
Texture fill rate19.20no data
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs24no data
L1 Cache48 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KBno 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).

Bus supportPCIe 2.0 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1050 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGAno data
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1112_2
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data

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.

HD 6670 1.74
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 9.46
+444%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 6670 1130
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 5295
+369%

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 HD4−5
−525%
25
+525%

Cost per frame, $

1080p24.75no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how HD 6670 and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 525% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.74 9.46
Recency 19 April 2011 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 443.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6670 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6670 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.


AMD Radeon HD 6670
Radeon HD 6670
Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

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.


3.4 998 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6670 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 37 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6670 or Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.