Arc A750 vs Radeon RX Vega M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M and Arc A750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega M
2018
15 Watt
15.48

A750 outperforms M by an impressive 92% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking375214
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data53.71
Power efficiency80.0010.23
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameVegaDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 February 2018 (7 years ago)12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores5123584
Core clock speed720 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors4,500 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate38.08537.6
Floating-point processing powerno data17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs8112
TMUs32224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28
L2 Cacheno data16 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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan-1.3
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.

RX Vega M 15.48
Arc A750 29.70
+91.9%

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.

RX Vega M 6552
Samples: 389
Arc A750 12570
+91.8%
Samples: 1398

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 HD55−60
−94.5%
107
+94.5%
1440p30−35
−103%
61
+103%
4K18−20
−100%
36
+100%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.70
1440pno data4.74
4Kno data8.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 336
+0%
336
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75
+0%
75
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 111
+0%
111
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270
+0%
270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 66
+0%
66
+0%
Far Cry 5 111
+0%
111
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+0%
112
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 132
+0%
132
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 85
+0%
85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 144
+0%
144
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 102
+0%
102
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 106
+0%
106
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 121
+0%
121
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 99
+0%
99
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 68
+0%
68
+0%
Metro Exodus 105
+0%
105
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 185
+0%
185
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55
+0%
55
+0%
Far Cry 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 55
+0%
55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 89
+0%
89
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 65
+0%
65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 42
+0%
42
+0%
Far Cry 5 76
+0%
76
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 79
+0%
79
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 42
+0%
42
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 43
+0%
43
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how RX Vega M and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 95% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 103% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A750 is 100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.48 29.70
Recency 1 February 2018 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 225 Watt

RX Vega M has 1400% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 91.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega M in performance tests.

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 M
Radeon RX Vega M
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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.


1.7 9 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 994 votes

Rate Arc A750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega M or Arc A750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.