Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Radeon Pro W6800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro W6800 with Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

Pro W6800
2021
32 GB GDDR6, 250 Watt
44.51
+405%

Pro W6800 outperforms Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) by a whopping 405% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking59456
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation28.55no data
Power efficiency14.13no data
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameNavi 21Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 June 2021 (3 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,249 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores38404
Core clock speed2075 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2320 MHz1950 MHz
Number of transistors26,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology7 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate556.8no data
Floating-point processing power17.82 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs240no data
Ray Tracing Cores60no 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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16no data
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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount32 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed2000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+
Resizable BAR+-

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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPortno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12_2
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.2-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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 W6800 44.51
+405%
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 8.82

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Pro W6800 44404
+555%
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 6776

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Pro W6800 27937
+428%
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 5295

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Pro W6800 92363
+210%
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 29765

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Pro W6800 440592
+49.3%
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 295187

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 HD137
+448%
25
−448%
1440p116
+452%
21−24
−452%
4K84
+425%
16−18
−425%

Cost per frame, $

1080p16.42no data
1440p19.39no data
4K26.77no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 140−150
+448%
27−30
−448%
Counter-Strike 2 260−270
+1900%
13
−1900%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+448%
21−24
−448%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 140−150
+448%
27−30
−448%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+255%
40−45
−255%
Counter-Strike 2 260−270
+2264%
11
−2264%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+448%
21−24
−448%
Far Cry 5 70
+119%
30−35
−119%
Fortnite 200−210
+415%
40−45
−415%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+268%
50
−268%
Forza Horizon 5 140−150
+400%
27−30
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+409%
30−35
−409%
Valorant 260−270
+188%
90−95
−188%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 140−150
+825%
16
−825%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+255%
40−45
−255%
Counter-Strike 2 260−270
+1900%
13
−1900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+405%
55−60
−405%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+475%
20−22
−475%
Dota 2 99
+450%
18−20
−450%
Far Cry 5 65
+171%
24
−171%
Fortnite 200−210
+261%
55−60
−261%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+372%
39
−372%
Forza Horizon 5 140−150
+400%
27−30
−400%
Grand Theft Auto V 121
+707%
15
−707%
Metro Exodus 160
+742%
18−20
−742%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+409%
30−35
−409%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 199
+696%
24−27
−696%
Valorant 260−270
+188%
90−95
−188%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 140−150
+255%
40−45
−255%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+475%
20−22
−475%
Dota 2 86
+438%
16−18
−438%
Far Cry 5 62
+93.8%
30−35
−93.8%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+513%
30
−513%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+409%
30−35
−409%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 157
+423%
30−33
−423%
Valorant 260−270
+188%
90−95
−188%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 200−210
+415%
40−45
−415%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+450%
24−27
−450%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+360%
70−75
−360%
Grand Theft Auto V 88
+529%
14−16
−529%
Metro Exodus 171
+1455%
10−12
−1455%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+272%
45−50
−272%
Valorant 290−300
+438%
55−60
−438%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+413%
21−24
−413%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+500%
10−11
−500%
Far Cry 5 64
+220%
20−22
−220%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+530%
21−24
−530%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95−100
+547%
14−16
−547%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+446%
24−27
−446%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+1900%
3−4
−1900%
Grand Theft Auto V 125
+525%
20−22
−525%
Metro Exodus 55
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+890%
10−11
−890%
Valorant 280−290
+416%
55−60
−416%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+550%
12−14
−550%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+1900%
3−4
−1900%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+460%
5−6
−460%
Dota 2 94
+422%
18−20
−422%
Far Cry 5 60
+500%
10−11
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+525%
16−18
−525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+744%
9−10
−744%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+467%
12−14
−467%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how Pro W6800 and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 448% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 452% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 425% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Pro W6800 is 2264% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is ahead in 44 tests (76%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 44.51 8.82
Recency 8 June 2021 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm

Pro W6800 has a 404.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W6800 is a workstation card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is a notebook one.

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 W6800
Radeon Pro W6800
Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

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.


3.9 83 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 10 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro W6800 or Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.