Arc A770M vs Radeon Pro SSG

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro SSG with Arc A770M, including specs and performance data.

Pro SSG
2016, $9,999
4 GB HBM, 260 Watt
26.23

A770M outperforms Pro SSG by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking249224
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.50no data
Power efficiency7.7718.19
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameFijiDG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date26 July 2016 (9 years ago)2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$9,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores40964096
Core clock speed1000 MHz1650 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)260 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate268.8524.8
Floating-point processing power8.602 TFLOPS16.79 TFLOPS
ROPs64128
TMUs256256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L1 Cache1 MB6 MB
L2 Cache4 MB16 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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
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 GB16 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.2Portable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Pro SSG 26.23
Arc A770M 28.34
+8%

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.

Pro SSG 10971
Samples: 6
Arc A770M 11879
+8.3%
Samples: 163

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
−15.7%
81
+15.7%
1440p45−50
−11.1%
50
+11.1%
4K30−35
−16.7%
35
+16.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p142.84no data
1440p222.20no data
4K333.30no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 113
+0%
113
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95
+0%
95
+0%
Far Cry 5 106
+0%
106
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 77
+0%
77
+0%
Dota 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 99
+0%
99
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 93
+0%
93
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 173
+0%
173
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 67
+0%
67
+0%
Dota 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 81
+0%
81
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+0%
62
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 22
+0%
22
+0%
Dota 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how Pro SSG and Arc A770M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770M is 16% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770M is 11% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770M is 17% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.23 28.34
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 260 Watt 120 Watt

Arc A770M has a 8% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 367% more advanced lithography process, and 117% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro SSG and Arc A770M.

Be aware that Radeon Pro SSG is a workstation graphics card while Arc A770M 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2 3653 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 94 votes

Rate Arc A770M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro SSG or Arc A770M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.