Arc Graphics 140V vs Radeon R9 M395X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M395X and Arc Graphics 140V, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M395X
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
13.34
+1.1%

R9 M395X outperforms Arc Graphics 140V by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking389392
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.40no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Xe² (2025)
GPU code nameAmethystLunar Lake iGPU
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)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 cores20488
Core clock speed723 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate92.54no data
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs128no 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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212_2
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCLNot Listedno data
Mantle+-

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.

R9 M395X 13.34
+1.1%
Arc Graphics 140V 13.20

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.

R9 M395X 5194
+1%
Arc Graphics 140V 5142

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.

R9 M395X 7921
Arc Graphics 140V 9492
+19.8%

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 HD40−45
−2.5%
41
+2.5%
1440p21−24
+0%
21
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
−96.9%
63
+96.9%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−95.7%
45
+95.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
−37.5%
44
+37.5%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−60.9%
37
+60.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−18.6%
51
+18.6%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
Valorant 110−120
+0.9%
100−110
−0.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+6.7%
30
−6.7%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−30.4%
30
+30.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0.6%
170−180
−0.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+5%
80−85
−5%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−4.7%
45
+4.7%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+9.1%
44
−9.1%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−82.4%
62
+82.4%
Valorant 110−120
+0.9%
100−110
−0.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−8.7%
25
+8.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+5%
80−85
−5%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+2.4%
42
−2.4%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+21.4%
28
−21.4%
Valorant 110−120
+0.9%
100−110
−0.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+11.1%
18
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+3.1%
95−100
−3.1%
Valorant 130−140
+0.7%
130−140
−0.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−29.6%
35
+29.6%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3.3%
30−33
−3.3%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+1.5%
65−70
−1.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Dota 2 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how R9 M395X and Arc Graphics 140V compete in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 140V is 3% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 1440p

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 M395X is 25% faster.
  • in Atomic Heart, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Arc Graphics 140V is 97% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 M395X is ahead in 26 tests (41%)
  • Arc Graphics 140V is ahead in 10 tests (16%)
  • there's a draw in 28 tests (44%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.34 13.20
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 3 nm

R9 M395X has a 1.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc Graphics 140V, on the other hand, has a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 M395X and Arc Graphics 140V.

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 R9 M395X
Radeon R9 M395X
Intel Arc Graphics 140V
Arc Graphics 140V

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.


4.1 16 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M395X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 12 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M395X or Arc Graphics 140V, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.