Arc A770 vs Tesla P4

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla P4 with Arc A770, including specs and performance data.

Tesla P4
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
23.18

Arc A770 outperforms Tesla P4 by a considerable 45% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking247154
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data55.71
Power efficiency21.6410.48
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGP104DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date13 September 2016 (8 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 cores25604096
Core clock speed886 MHz2100 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate178.2614.4
Floating-point processing power5.704 TFLOPS19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs64128
TMUs160256
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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.3 GB/s512.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x 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 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA6.1-
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.

Tesla P4 23.18
Arc A770 33.67
+45.3%

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.

Tesla P4 9060
Arc A770 13163
+45.3%

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 HD75−80
−49.3%
112
+49.3%
1440p40−45
−60%
64
+60%
4K27−30
−51.9%
41
+51.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.94
1440pno data5.14
4Kno data8.02

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 116
+0%
116
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+0%
70−75
+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%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+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%
Far Cry 5 71
+0%
71
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 258
+0%
258
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+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%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 45
+0%
45
+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%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 158
+0%
158
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+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 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 48
+0%
48
+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 15
+0%
15
+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%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how Tesla P4 and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770 is 49% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770 is 60% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770 is 52% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 23.18 33.67
Recency 13 September 2016 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 225 Watt

Tesla P4 has 200% lower power consumption.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has a 45.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 166.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla P4 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla P4 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A770 is a desktop one.

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 Tesla P4
Tesla P4
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.


4.5 80 votes

Rate Tesla P4 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5380 votes

Rate Arc A770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tesla P4 or Arc A770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.