Arc A370M vs Radeon Pro 5300M

Place in performance ranking	320	317
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.66	no data
Architecture	Navi / RDNA (2019−2020)	Xe HPG (2020−2022)
GPU code name	Navi 14	Alchemist
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	13 November 2019 (4 years ago)	30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Current price	$2068	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1280	8
Core clock speed	no data	1550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1250 MHz	1550 MHz
Number of transistors	6,400 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	50 Watt (35 - 50 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	100.0	99.20

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro 5300M and Arc A370M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 4.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	96 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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Pro 5300M 15.49

Arc A370M 15.77
+1.8%

Arc A370M outperforms Radeon Pro 5300M by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Pro 5300M 5994
+17.2%

Arc A370M 5115

Radeon Pro 5300M outperforms Arc A370M by 17% in Passmark.

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	35−40 −11.4%	39 +11.4%
1440p	18−21 −16.7%	21 +16.7%
4K	30−35 −13.3%	34 +13.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

24−27

−91.7%

46
+91.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 −3.1%	30−35 +3.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 −26.9%	33 +26.9%
Battlefield 5	50−55 −1.9%	50−55 +1.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 −2.5%	40−45 +2.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −54.2%	37 +54.2%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −22.5%	49 +22.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 −2.4%	40−45 +2.4%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −1.9%	55−60 +1.9%
Hitman 3	40−45 −27.9%	55 +27.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −21.2%	40 +21.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 −53.1%	49 +53.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −55.2%	45 +55.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 −3.1%	30−35 +3.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 +30%	20 −30%
Battlefield 5	50−55 −1.9%	50−55 +1.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 −2.5%	40−45 +2.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −4.2%	25 +4.2%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −15%	46 +15%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 −2.4%	40−45 +2.4%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −1.9%	55−60 +1.9%
Hitman 3	40−45 −11.6%	48 +11.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +0%	33 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −41.7%	34 +41.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 −12.5%	36 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −60.6%	53 +60.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −17.2%	34 +17.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 −3.1%	30−35 +3.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 +44.4%	18 −44.4%
Battlefield 5	50−55 −1.9%	50−55 +1.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +14.3%	21 −14.3%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −7.5%	43 +7.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 −2.4%	40−45 +2.4%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −1.9%	55−60 +1.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +26.9%	26 −26.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +93.3%	15 −93.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Hitman 3	24−27 +4.3%	23 −4.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −9.5%	23 +9.5%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −42.9%	20 +42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20−22 +0%	20 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	13 +0%
Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −16%	29 +16%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −3.3%	30−35 +3.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 −10%	11 +10%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Hitman 3	14−16 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Battlefield 5	16−18 −6.3%	16−18 +6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −4.8%	21−24 +4.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

This is how Pro 5300M and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

Arc A370M is 11.4% faster than Pro 5300M in 1080p
Arc A370M is 16.7% faster than Pro 5300M in 1440p
Arc A370M is 13.3% faster than Pro 5300M in 4K

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 93.3% faster than the Arc A370M.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Arc A370M is 91.7% faster than the Pro 5300M.

All in all, in popular games: