Arc A770 vs TITAN Xp

Place in the ranking	60	154
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	12.53	55.23
Power efficiency	13.91	10.47
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GP102	DG2-512
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	6 April 2017 (7 years ago)	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,199	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A770 has 341% better value for money than TITAN Xp.

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	3840	4096
Core clock speed	1405 MHz	2100 MHz
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	225 Watt
Texture fill rate	379.7	614.4
Floating-point processing power	12.15 TFLOPS	19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	128
TMUs	240	256
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	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	GDDR5X	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1426 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	547.6 GB/s	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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	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	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	6.1	-

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.

TITAN Xp 50.53
+47.6%

Arc A770 34.23

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.

TITAN Xp 19424
+47.6%

Arc A770 13158

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	160−170 +42.9%	112 −42.9%
1440p	90−95 +40.6%	64 −40.6%
4K	60−65 +46.3%	41 −46.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	7.49 −155%	2.94 +155%
1440p	13.32 −159%	5.14 +159%
4K	19.98 −149%	8.02 +149%

Arc A770 has 155% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Arc A770 has 159% lower cost per frame in 1440p
Arc A770 has 149% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	116 +0%	116 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Elden Ring	88 +0%	88 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	99 +0%	99 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	304 +0%	304 +0%
Metro Exodus	120 +0%	120 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Valorant	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	88 +0%	88 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Dota 2	105 +0%	105 +0%
Elden Ring	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry 5	71 +0%	71 +0%
Fortnite	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	258 +0%	258 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	105 +0%	105 +0%
Metro Exodus	99 +0%	99 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Valorant	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	83 +0%	83 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	216 +0%	216 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Valorant	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45 +0%	45 +0%
Elden Ring	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +0%	45 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	59 +0%	59 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	158 +0%	158 +0%
Metro Exodus	91 +0%	91 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60 +0%	60 +0%
Valorant	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	28 +0%	28 +0%
Dota 2	48 +0%	48 +0%
Elden Ring	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	48 +0%	48 +0%
Metro Exodus	47 +0%	47 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	48 +0%	48 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Fortnite	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	89 +0%	89 +0%
Valorant	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

This is how TITAN Xp and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

TITAN Xp is 43% faster in 1080p
TITAN Xp is 41% faster in 1440p
TITAN Xp is 46% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	50.53	34.23
Recency	6 April 2017	12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	225 Watt

TITAN Xp has a 47.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 166.7% more advanced lithography process, and 11.1% lower power consumption.

The TITAN Xp is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A770 in performance tests.

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