Arc A370M vs ATI Radeon IGP 340M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1603441
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data26.84
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRS200DG2-128
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 October 2002 (23 years ago)30 March 2022 (3 years 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 cores21024
Core clock speed183 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed180 MHz1550 MHz
Number of transistors30 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rate0.3799.20
Floating-point processing powerno data3.174 TFLOPS
ROPs232
TMUs264
Ray Tracing Coresno data8
L1 Cacheno data1.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data4 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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 4.0 x8
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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data112.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX7.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGL1.44.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

ATI IGP 340M 2
Samples: 4
Arc A370M 5115
+255650%
Samples: 2

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 HDno data39
1440pno data20
4Kno data34

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 46
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−760%
43
+760%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 37
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2550%
50−55
+2550%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−500%
30
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Valorant 21−24
−374%
100−110
+374%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−1856%
170−180
+1856%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 25
Dota 2 7−8
−871%
68
+871%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2550%
50−55
+2550%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−300%
20
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−960%
53
+960%
Valorant 21−24
−374%
100−110
+374%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 21
Dota 2 7−8
−843%
66
+843%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2550%
50−55
+2550%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−160%
13
+160%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−420%
26
+420%
Valorant 21−24
−374%
100−110
+374%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−71.4%
24−27
+71.4%
Valorant 0−1 65−70

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+0%
11
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A370M is 2900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A370M performs better in 24 tests (39%)
  • there's a draw in 37 tests (61%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 October 2002 30 March 2022
Chip lithography 180 nm 6 nm

Arc A370M has an age advantage of 19 years, and a 2900% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon IGP 340M and Arc A370M. We've got no test results to judge.

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.


ATI Radeon IGP 340M
Radeon IGP 340M
Intel Arc A370M
Arc A370M

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.


5 2 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 340M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 188 votes

Rate Arc A370M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon IGP 340M or Arc A370M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.