Arc A530M vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Arc A530M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
9.01

Arc A530M outperforms RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) by a whopping 101% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking488307
Place by popularity28not in top-100
Power efficiency41.3519.22
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameVegaDG2-256
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)1 August 2023 (1 year ago)

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 cores5121536
Core clock speedno data900 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHz1300 MHz
Number of transistorsno data11,500 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rateno data124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.994 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data96
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data224.0 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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3

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 HD23
−95.7%
45−50
+95.7%
1440p17
−76.5%
30−35
+76.5%
4K9
−100%
18−20
+100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13
−146%
30−35
+146%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
−89.5%
35−40
+89.5%
Elden Ring 18
−217%
55−60
+217%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−256%
30−35
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
−140%
35−40
+140%
Forza Horizon 4 32
−134%
75−80
+134%
Metro Exodus 27
−81.5%
45−50
+81.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
−30.3%
40−45
+30.3%
Valorant 44
−65.9%
70−75
+65.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−256%
30−35
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−227%
35−40
+227%
Dota 2 29
−124%
65−70
+124%
Elden Ring 22
−159%
55−60
+159%
Far Cry 5 30
−110%
60−65
+110%
Fortnite 50−55
−84.9%
95−100
+84.9%
Forza Horizon 4 27
−178%
75−80
+178%
Grand Theft Auto V 19
−237%
60−65
+237%
Metro Exodus 19
−158%
45−50
+158%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 57
−119%
120−130
+119%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12
−258%
40−45
+258%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−107%
55−60
+107%
Valorant 14
−421%
70−75
+421%
World of Tanks 48
−356%
210−220
+356%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−88.2%
30−35
+88.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−300%
35−40
+300%
Dota 2 48
−97.9%
95−100
+97.9%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−65.8%
60−65
+65.8%
Forza Horizon 4 23
−226%
75−80
+226%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−76.1%
120−130
+76.1%
Valorant 37
−97.3%
70−75
+97.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9
−211%
27−30
+211%
Elden Ring 12
−142%
27−30
+142%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−211%
27−30
+211%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
−650%
160−170
+650%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
World of Tanks 21
−495%
120−130
+495%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−118%
35−40
+118%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2
−600%
14−16
+600%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−147%
45−50
+147%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−188%
45−50
+188%
Metro Exodus 17
−141%
40−45
+141%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−118%
24−27
+118%
Valorant 39
−17.9%
45−50
+17.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Dota 2 10
−210%
30−35
+210%
Elden Ring 6
−117%
12−14
+117%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
−210%
30−35
+210%
Metro Exodus 6
−117%
12−14
+117%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 13
−315%
50−55
+315%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
−210%
30−35
+210%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Dota 2 18
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−109%
21−24
+109%
Fortnite 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 9
−189%
24−27
+189%
Valorant 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Arc A530M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A530M is 96% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A530M is 76% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A530M is 100% faster in 4K

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A530M is 650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Arc A530M surpassed RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in all 61 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.01 18.15
Recency 7 January 2020 1 August 2023
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has 333.3% lower power consumption.

Arc A530M, on the other hand, has a 101.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A530M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.


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 RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Intel Arc A530M
Arc A530M

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.


3.8 1260 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 201 vote

Rate Arc A530M 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.