Arc 8-Core iGPU vs Radeon PRO W7800
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon PRO W7800 with Arc 8-Core iGPU, including specs and performance data.
PRO W7800 outperforms Arc 8-Core iGPU by a whopping 282% 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 | 30 | 341 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 12.93 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 18.81 | no data |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) | Xe LPG (2023) |
| GPU code name | Navi 31 | Meteor Lake iGPU |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 April 2023 (2 years ago) | 14 December 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 4480 | 8 |
| Core clock speed | 1895 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2525 MHz | 2300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 57,700 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 260 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 707.0 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 45.25 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 128 | no data |
| TMUs | 280 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 70 | 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 | PCIe 4.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 280 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 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 | GDDR6 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 2250 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | no data |
| 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 Connectors | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12_2 |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | - |
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 | 130−140
+271%
| 35
−271%
|
| 1440p | 60−65
+253%
| 17
−253%
|
| 4K | 50−55
+257%
| 14
−257%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 19.22 | no data |
| 1440p | 41.65 | no data |
| 4K | 49.98 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 111
+0%
|
111
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| God of War | 30
+0%
|
30
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85
+0%
|
85
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+0%
|
39
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| God of War | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 42
+0%
|
42
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
+0%
|
36
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| God of War | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 25
+0%
|
25
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 48
+0%
|
48
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| God of War | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| God of War | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9
+0%
|
9
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| God of War | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
This is how PRO W7800 and Arc 8-Core iGPU compete in popular games:
- PRO W7800 is 271% faster in 1080p
- PRO W7800 is 253% faster in 1440p
- PRO W7800 is 257% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 64.19 | 16.81 |
| Recency | 13 April 2023 | 14 December 2023 |
PRO W7800 has a 281.9% higher aggregate performance score.
Arc 8-Core iGPU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months.
The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc 8-Core iGPU in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation graphics card while Arc 8-Core iGPU is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
