Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Radeon HD 8180
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8180 and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms HD 8180 by a whopping 2856% 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 | 1368 | 494 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 6.14 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Xe LPG (2023) |
| GPU code name | Kalindi | Meteor Lake iGPU |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | November 2013 (12 years ago) | 14 December 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 cores | 128 | 4 |
| Core clock speed | 225 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1950 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 1.800 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0576 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | no data |
| TMUs | 8 | no 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).
| Interface | IGP | no 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 type | System Shared | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | no data |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | no data |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12_2 |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
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.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
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.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
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 | 0−1 | 25 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50
+1150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−386%
|
30−35
+386%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−254%
|
90−95
+254%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−2757%
|
400−450
+2757%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1900%
|
20−22
+1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−2800%
|
290−300
+2800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−875%
|
39
+875%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−386%
|
30−35
+386%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−400%
|
24−27
+400%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−254%
|
90−95
+254%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1900%
|
20−22
+1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−2800%
|
290−300
+2800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−650%
|
30
+650%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−386%
|
30−35
+386%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−2700%
|
140−150
+2700%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−254%
|
90−95
+254%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−2733%
|
85−90
+2733%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 70−75 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−1533%
|
45−50
+1533%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−2650%
|
55−60
+2650%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−2200%
|
21−24
+2200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−1200%
|
12−14
+1200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−42.9%
|
20−22
+42.9%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−2650%
|
55−60
+2650%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2650%
|
55−60
+2650%
|
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 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 13
+0%
|
13
+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 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
1440p
High
| 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%
|
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 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+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%
|
| 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%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 2200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) performs better in 17 tests (30%)
- there's a draw in 40 tests (70%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.32 | 9.46 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 2856.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8180 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
