Arc A310 vs UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) with Arc A310, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
2021
15 Watt
14.07

Arc A310 outperforms UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking372367
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency64.5713.06
Architectureno dataGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRocket Lake GT1DG2-128
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date30 March 2021 (3 years ago)12 October 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 data768
Core clock speedno data2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistorsno data7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data64.00
Floating-point processing powerno data3.072 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1937 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data124.0 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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-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.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 14.07
Arc A310 14.23
+1.1%

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.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 11485
Arc A310 11915
+3.7%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 1768
Arc A310 46839
+2549%

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.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 1613
Arc A310 8464
+425%

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.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 83293
+56.4%
Arc A310 53244

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 HD12
−208%
37
+208%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−28%
32
+28%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Elden Ring 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−4%
26
+4%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Forza Horizon 4 14
−471%
80
+471%
Metro Exodus 10
−290%
35−40
+290%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 55−60
−1.8%
55−60
+1.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−4%
26
+4%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Dota 2 13
−115%
28
+115%
Elden Ring 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Fortnite 75−80
−1.3%
80−85
+1.3%
Forza Horizon 4 12
−442%
65
+442%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
−367%
28
+367%
Metro Exodus 7
−457%
35−40
+457%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
−1%
100−110
+1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 55−60
−1.8%
55−60
+1.8%
World of Tanks 180−190
−0.5%
180−190
+0.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Dota 2 25
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+5.6%
54
−5.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
−1%
100−110
+1%
Valorant 55−60
−1.8%
55−60
+1.8%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Elden Ring 21−24
−4.8%
21−24
+4.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
−2.6%
120−130
+2.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 95−100
−1%
100−105
+1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−3%
30−35
+3%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−33
−3.3%
30−35
+3.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−2.4%
40−45
+2.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) and Arc A310 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A310 is 208% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is 6% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A310 is 471% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • Arc A310 is ahead in 27 tests (49%)
  • there's a draw in 27 tests (49%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.07 14.23
Recency 30 March 2021 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 75 Watt

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) has 400% lower power consumption.

Arc A310, on the other hand, has a 1.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) and Arc A310.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is a notebook card while Arc A310 is a desktop 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.


Intel UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
Intel Arc A310
Arc A310

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.


3.8 114 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 260 votes

Rate Arc A310 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.