Arctic Sound-M vs Tegra 3 GPU

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
ArchitectureVLIW Vec4 (2010−2013)Generation 12.5 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameTegra 3Arctic Sound
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date9 November 2011 (13 years ago)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 coresno data8192
Core clock speed416 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed520 MHzno data
Number of transistors10 million8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt500 Watt
Texture fill rate4.160230.4
Floating-point processing powerno data14.75 TFLOPS
ROPs8128
TMUs8256

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
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data8-pin EPS

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 SharedHBM2e
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared4096 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data1.23 TB/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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXN/A12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLES 2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 500 Watt

Tegra 3 GPU has 2400% lower power consumption.

Arctic Sound-M, on the other hand, has a 300% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Tegra 3 GPU and Arctic Sound-M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Tegra 3 GPU is a notebook card while Arctic Sound-M 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.


NVIDIA Tegra 3 GPU
Tegra 3 GPU
Intel Arctic Sound-M
Arctic Sound-M

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.


4 1 vote

Rate Tegra 3 GPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Arctic Sound-M 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.