Arc A750 vs Radeon Vega 7

Place in the ranking	537	181
Place by popularity	10	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	57.19
Power efficiency	11.45	9.75
Architecture	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	Cezanne	DG2-512
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	13 April 2021 (3 years ago)	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	448	3584
Core clock speed	300 MHz	2050 MHz
Boost clock speed	1900 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	9,800 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	225 Watt
Texture fill rate	53.20	537.6
Floating-point processing power	1.702 TFLOPS	17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	112
TMUs	28	224
Tensor Cores	no data	448
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	28

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).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 4.0 x16
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	System Shared	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	8 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	512.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.1	3.0
Vulkan	1.2	1.3

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Vega 7 7.39

Arc A750 31.46
+326%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Vega 7 5249

Arc A750 37288
+610%

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.

Vega 7 3348

Arc A750 29667
+786%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Vega 7 24726

Arc A750 130715
+429%

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 HD	23 −374%	109 +374%
1440p	25 −136%	59 +136%
4K	15 −140%	36 +140%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.65
1440p	no data	4.90
4K	no data	8.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2

14−16

−550%

91
+550%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −283%	90−95 +283%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −529%	88 +529%
Forza Horizon 4	29 −883%	285 +883%
Forza Horizon 5	18 −361%	80−85 +361%
Metro Exodus	21 −452%	116 +452%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 −144%	65−70 +144%
Valorant	29 −338%	120−130 +338%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −283%	90−95 +283%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −443%	76 +443%
Dota 2	17 −482%	99 +482%
Far Cry 5	28 −143%	68 +143%
Fortnite	40−45 −239%	140−150 +239%
Forza Horizon 4	24 −896%	239 +896%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −388%	80−85 +388%
Metro Exodus	15 −527%	94 +527%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	46 −296%	180−190 +296%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −214%	65−70 +214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −370%	100−110 +370%
Valorant	14 −807%	120−130 +807%
World of Tanks	58 −376%	270−280 +376%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −283%	90−95 +283%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −436%	75 +436%
Far Cry 5	30−35 −167%	85−90 +167%
Forza Horizon 4	21 −848%	199 +848%
Forza Horizon 5	12 −592%	80−85 +592%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −203%	180−190 +203%
Valorant	25 −408%	120−130 +408%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	9−10 −356%	41 +356%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −400%	30−33 +400%
World of Tanks	50−55 −280%	200−210 +280%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −377%	60−65 +377%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −525%	100−105 +525%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −867%	145 +867%
Forza Horizon 5	10−12 −373%	50−55 +373%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −682%	86 +682%
Valorant	18−20 −384%	90−95 +384%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −117%	12−14 +117%
Dota 2	18−20 −150%	45 +150%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −1333%	43 +1333%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −355%	100−105 +355%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −300%	20−22 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −150%	45 +150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −133%	14 +133%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −389%	40−45 +389%
Fortnite	7−8 −500%	40−45 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −950%	84 +950%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −460%	27−30 +460%
Valorant	7−8 −571%	45−50 +571%

Full HD
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	41 +0%	41 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V

+0%

This is how Vega 7 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

Arc A750 is 374% faster in 1080p
Arc A750 is 136% faster in 1440p
Arc A750 is 140% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A750 is 1333% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Arc A750 is ahead in 50 tests (91%)
there's a draw in 5 tests (9%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.39	31.46
Recency	13 April 2021	12 October 2022
Chip lithography	7 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	225 Watt

Vega 7 has 400% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 325.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Vega 7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 7 is a notebook card while Arc A750 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.