Arc A770 vs Radeon RX Vega M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M and Arc A770, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega M
2018
15 Watt
14.73

Arc A770 outperforms RX Vega M by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking338163
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data52.73
Power efficiency77.8510.39
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 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

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 cores5124096
Core clock speed720 MHz2100 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 rate38.08614.4
Floating-point processing powerno data19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs8128
TMUs32256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 Shared16 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

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 data1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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 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.

RX Vega M 14.73
Arc A770 29.50
+100%

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 6581
Arc A770 13182
+100%

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 HD50−55
−118%
109
+118%
1440p30−35
−113%
64
+113%
4K18−20
−117%
39
+117%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.02
1440pno data5.14
4Kno data8.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 317
+0%
317
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 125
+0%
125
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 270
+0%
270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70
+0%
70
+0%
Far Cry 5 117
+0%
117
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 139
+0%
139
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 92
+0%
92
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 143
+0%
143
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 109
+0%
109
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 127
+0%
127
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 105
+0%
105
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 74
+0%
74
+0%
Metro Exodus 113
+0%
113
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 196
+0%
196
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 62
+0%
62
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+0%
72
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Far Cry 5 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 48
+0%
48
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+0%
73
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8
+0%
8
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 27
+0%
27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how RX Vega M and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770 is 118% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770 is 113% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770 is 117% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.73 29.50
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 A770, on the other hand, has a 100.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770 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 A770
Arc A770

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
4.7 5401 vote

Rate Arc A770 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 A770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.