Arc A580 vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

Place in performance ranking	146	85
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.14	39.41
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Vega 10	DG2-512
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	27 June 2017 (7 years ago)	10 October 2023 (less than a year ago)
Current price	$6074	$337

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A580 has 1742% better value for money than Pro Vega 64.

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	4096	3072
Core clock speed	1250 MHz	1700 MHz
Boost clock speed	1350 MHz	2000 MHz
Number of transistors	12,500 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	175 Watt
Texture fill rate	345.6	384.0
Floating-point performance	11,059 gflops	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 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	IGP	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 8-pin

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	HBM2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	2048 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1572 MHz	16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	402.4 GB/s	512.0 GB/s

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	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	no data	+

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	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.125	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 Vega 64 33.53

Arc A580 41.42
+23.5%

Arc A580 outperforms Radeon Pro Vega 64 by 24% based on our aggregate 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 Vega 64 12949
+11.8%

Arc A580 11584

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms Arc A580 by 12% 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	80−85 −23.8%	99 +23.8%
1440p	45−50 −24.4%	56 +24.4%
4K	27−30 −33.3%	36 +33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	103 −16.5%	120−130 +16.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	85 −17.6%	100−105 +17.6%
Battlefield 5	130−140 −20.3%	160−170 +20.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 −19%	100−105 +19%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −13.6%	100−105 +13.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 −17.6%	120−130 +17.6%
Forza Horizon 4	107 −21.5%	130−140 +21.5%
Hitman 3	85−90 −17.6%	100−105 +17.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	189 −21.7%	230−240 +21.7%
Metro Exodus	110−120 −20.7%	140−150 +20.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 −22.4%	120−130 +22.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	258 −16.3%	300−310 +16.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	93 −18.3%	110−120 +18.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	86 −16.3%	100−105 +16.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	73 −23.3%	90−95 +23.3%
Battlefield 5	130−140 −20.3%	160−170 +20.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 −19%	100−105 +19%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −13.6%	100−105 +13.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 −17.6%	120−130 +17.6%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −23.4%	190−200 +23.4%
Hitman 3	85−90 −17.6%	100−105 +17.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	160−170 −18.3%	200−210 +18.3%
Metro Exodus	62 −21%	75−80 +21%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 −22.4%	120−130 +22.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	214 −21.5%	260−270 +21.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	174 −20.7%	210−220 +20.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−105 −20%	120−130 +20%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	64 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	64 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 −19%	100−105 +19%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −13.6%	100−105 +13.6%
Forza Horizon 4	87 −14.9%	100−105 +14.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	109 −19.3%	130−140 +19.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	177 −18.6%	210−220 +18.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	68 −17.6%	80−85 +17.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60 −16.7%	70−75 +16.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

95−100
−22.4%

120−130

+22.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −18.8%	95−100 +18.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	95−100 −13.4%	110−120 +13.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	54 −20.4%	65−70 +20.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	51 −17.6%	60−65 +17.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Far Cry 5	87 −14.9%	100−105 +14.9%
Forza Horizon 4	75 −20%	90−95 +20%
Hitman 3	50−55 −20.4%	65−70 +20.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	87 −14.9%	100−105 +14.9%
Metro Exodus	91 −20.9%	110−120 +20.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	130 −23.1%	160−170 +23.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55 −18.2%	65−70 +18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	47 −17%	55−60 +17%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

70−75

−19.7%

85−90
+19.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −19%	50−55 +19%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −14.3%	40−45 +14.3%
Hitman 3	30−35 −17.6%	40−45 +17.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −22.6%	65−70 +22.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	39 −15.4%	45−50 +15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	61 −23%	75−80 +23%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35 −14.3%	40−45 +14.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 −11.1%	30−33 +11.1%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −20%	30−33 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	56 −16.1%	65−70 +16.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	51 −17.6%	60−65 +17.6%
Metro Exodus	52 −15.4%	60−65 +15.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27 −11.1%	30−33 +11.1%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

−21.6%

45−50
+21.6%

This is how Pro Vega 64 and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

Arc A580 is 24% faster in 1080p
Arc A580 is 24% faster in 1440p
Arc A580 is 33% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.53	41.42
Recency	27 June 2017	10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	175 Watt