Arc A730M 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 ranking1603266
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data22.52
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRS200DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 October 2002 (23 years ago)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 cores23072
Core clock speed183 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speed180 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors30 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data80 Watt
Texture fill rate0.37393.6
Floating-point processing powerno data12.6 TFLOPS
ROPs296
TMUs2192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24
L1 Cacheno data4.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data12 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 4.0 x16
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 Shared12 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data336.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

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
DLSS-+

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 A730M 9808
+490300%
Samples: 5

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 data73
1440pno data45
4Kno data22

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 71
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−1300%
70
+1300%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 64
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−4650%
95−100
+4650%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−880%
49
+880%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−1467%
90−95
+1467%
Valorant 21−24
−617%
160−170
+617%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−2756%
250−260
+2756%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 54
Dota 2 7−8
−1186%
90
+1186%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−4650%
95−100
+4650%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−780%
44
+780%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−1467%
90−95
+1467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−2100%
110
+2100%
Valorant 21−24
−617%
160−170
+617%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 52
Dota 2 7−8
−1043%
80
+1043%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−4650%
95−100
+4650%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−580%
34
+580%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−1467%
90−95
+1467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−800%
45
+800%
Valorant 21−24
−343%
102
+343%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−2550%
53
+2550%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−6000%
60−65
+6000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3700%
35−40
+3700%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−143%
34
+143%
Valorant 0−1 140−150

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−2400%
24−27
+2400%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 169
+0%
169
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 155
+0%
155
+0%
Far Cry 5 93
+0%
93
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 86
+0%
86
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 98
+0%
98
+0%
Far Cry 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80
+0%
80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 72
+0%
72
+0%
Metro Exodus 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 81
+0%
81
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 31
+0%
31
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 21
+0%
21
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+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 A730M is 6000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A730M performs better in 24 tests (39%)
  • there's a draw in 37 tests (61%)

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 180 nm 6 nm

Arc A730M has a 2900% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon IGP 340M and Arc A730M. 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 A730M
Arc A730M

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
3.8 115 votes

Rate Arc A730M 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 A730M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.