Arc Pro A40 vs Radeon Vega 3 Efficient

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRavenDG2-128
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date26 May 2018 (6 years ago)8 August 2022 (2 years 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 cores1921024
Core clock speed300 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1700 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate12.00108.8
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPS3.482 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1264
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 x8
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared96 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 GB/s

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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 May 2018 8 August 2022
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

Vega 3 Efficient has 233.3% lower power consumption.

Arc Pro A40, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 3 Efficient and Arc Pro A40. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 3 Efficient is a desktop card while Arc Pro A40 is a workstation one.


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 Vega 3 Efficient
Radeon Vega 3 Efficient
Intel Arc Pro A40
Arc Pro A40

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 44 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 3 Efficient on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 12 votes

Rate Arc Pro A40 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.