Arc A750 vs Radeon HD 8330E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8330E with Arc A750, including specs and performance data.

HD 8330E
2013
15 Watt
0.68

Arc A750 outperforms HD 8330E by a whopping 4563% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1181178
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data57.09
Power efficiency3.139.72
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameKalindiDG2-512
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 April 2013 (11 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

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 cores1283584
Core clock speed497 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate3.976537.6
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs4112
TMUs8224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

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 8330E 0.68
Arc A750 31.71
+4563%

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 8330E 262
Arc A750 12193
+4554%

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 HD2−3
−5350%
109
+5350%
1440p1−2
−5800%
59
+5800%
4K0−136

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.65
1440pno data4.90
4Kno data8.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 91
+0%
91
+0%
Elden Ring 84
+0%
84
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 285
+0%
285
+0%
Metro Exodus 116
+0%
116
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 76
+0%
76
+0%
Dota 2 99
+0%
99
+0%
Elden Ring 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 68
+0%
68
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 239
+0%
239
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 99
+0%
99
+0%
Metro Exodus 94
+0%
94
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 199
+0%
199
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 41
+0%
41
+0%
Elden Ring 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 145
+0%
145
+0%
Metro Exodus 86
+0%
86
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Dota 2 45
+0%
45
+0%
Elden Ring 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 43
+0%
43
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45
+0%
45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+0%
84
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how HD 8330E and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 5350% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 5800% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.68 31.71
Recency 23 April 2013 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 225 Watt

HD 8330E has 1400% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 4563.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8330E in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8330E is a notebook card while Arc A750 is a desktop one.


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 8330E
Radeon HD 8330E
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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 6 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8330E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 868 votes

Rate Arc A750 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.