Arc A310 vs Radeon HD 6970

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6970 and Arc A310, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6970
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 550 Watt
7.34

Arc A310 outperforms HD 6970 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking534366
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.00no data
Power efficiency2.0313.12
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameCaymanDG2-128
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date14 December 2010 (13 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$369 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1536768
Core clock speedno data2000 MHz
Boost clock speed880 MHz2000 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)550 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate84.4864.00
Floating-point processing power2.703 TFLOPS3.072 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs9632
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data124.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan-1.3

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 6970 7.34
Arc A310 14.23
+93.9%

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.

HD 6970 2831
Arc A310 5492
+94%

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 6970 3470
Arc A310 8464
+144%

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 HD18−21
−117%
39
+117%

Cost per frame, $

1080p20.50no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−168%
55−60
+168%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−140%
35−40
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−147%
40−45
+147%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−129%
45−50
+129%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−131%
110−120
+131%
Hitman 3 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−105%
85−90
+105%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−195%
60−65
+195%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−145%
45−50
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−136%
55−60
+136%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−59.3%
85−90
+59.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−168%
55−60
+168%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−140%
35−40
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−147%
40−45
+147%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−129%
45−50
+129%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−131%
110−120
+131%
Hitman 3 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−105%
85−90
+105%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−195%
60−65
+195%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−145%
45−50
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−160%
65
+160%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−86.4%
40−45
+86.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−59.3%
85−90
+59.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−140%
35−40
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−147%
40−45
+147%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−131%
110−120
+131%
Hitman 3 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−105%
85−90
+105%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−116%
54
+116%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−31.8%
29
+31.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−59.3%
85−90
+59.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−145%
45−50
+145%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−143%
30−35
+143%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−157%
18−20
+157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−186%
20−22
+186%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−163%
21−24
+163%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−263%
95−100
+263%
Hitman 3 10−12
−90.9%
21−24
+90.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−125%
35−40
+125%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−313%
30−35
+313%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−233%
20−22
+233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−130%
100−110
+130%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−123%
27−30
+123%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%
Hitman 3 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−283%
90−95
+283%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
−850%
18−20
+850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%

This is how HD 6970 and Arc A310 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A310 is 117% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A310 is 850% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Arc A310 surpassed HD 6970 in all 66 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.34 14.23
Recency 14 December 2010 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 550 Watt 75 Watt

Arc A310 has a 93.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 566.7% more advanced lithography process, and 633.3% lower power consumption.

The Arc A310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6970 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 6970
Radeon HD 6970
Intel Arc A310
Arc A310

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.7 155 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 247 votes

Rate Arc A310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.