Arc A350M vs Radeon Pro SSG

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro SSG with Arc A350M, including specs and performance data.

Pro SSG
2016
4 GB HBM, 260 Watt
28.45
+100%

Pro SSG outperforms Arc A350M by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking194369
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.09no data
Power efficiency8.0341.65
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameFijiDG2-128
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date26 July 2016 (8 years ago)30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$9,999 no data

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 cores4096768
Core clock speed1000 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)260 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate268.855.20
Floating-point processing power8.602 TFLOPS1.766 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs25648
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeHBMGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s112.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.2.1701.3

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 HD70−75
+94.4%
36
−94.4%
1440p30−35
+76.5%
17
−76.5%
4K21−24
+90.9%
11
−90.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27
+0%
27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35
+0%
35
+0%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+0%
19
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20
+0%
20
+0%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 53
+0%
53
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16
+0%
16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+0%
45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14
+0%
14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+0%
19
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how Pro SSG and Arc A350M compete in popular games:

  • Pro SSG is 94% faster in 1080p
  • Pro SSG is 76% faster in 1440p
  • Pro SSG is 91% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.45 14.19
Recency 26 July 2016 30 March 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 260 Watt 25 Watt

Pro SSG has a 100.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc A350M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 940% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro SSG is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A350M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro SSG is a workstation card while Arc A350M is a notebook 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 Pro SSG
Radeon Pro SSG
Intel Arc A350M
Arc A350M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.1 3258 votes

Rate Radeon Pro SSG on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 56 votes

Rate Arc A350M 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.