GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile vs Arc Graphics 130T
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc Graphics 130T and GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 5060 Mobile outperforms Arc Graphics 130T by a whopping 192% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 365 | 88 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 74.80 |
| Architecture | Xe+ (2025) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | no data | GB206 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago) | 20 May 2025 (less than a year 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 cores | 7 | 3328 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 952 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1455 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 21,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | no data | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 151.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 9.684 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 104 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 104 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 26 |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
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 | no data | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 384.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
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 data | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 12.0 |
| 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.
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.
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 | 27−30
−207%
| 83
+207%
|
| 1440p | 14−16
−214%
| 44
+214%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90
−174%
|
240−250
+174%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
−224%
|
100−110
+224%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 30−35
−282%
|
120−130
+282%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−115%
|
140−150
+115%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90
−174%
|
240−250
+174%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
−224%
|
100−110
+224%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
−173%
|
140−150
+173%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
−122%
|
190−200
+122%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
−166%
|
170−180
+166%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45−50
−184%
|
130−140
+184%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
−190%
|
160−170
+190%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
−100%
|
250−260
+100%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−115%
|
140−150
+115%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90
−174%
|
240−250
+174%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 200−210
−36.6%
|
280−290
+36.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
−224%
|
100−110
+224%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
−173%
|
140−150
+173%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
−122%
|
190−200
+122%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
−166%
|
170−180
+166%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45−50
−184%
|
130−140
+184%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55−60
−129%
|
135
+129%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
−233%
|
110−120
+233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
−190%
|
160−170
+190%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
−302%
|
160−170
+302%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
−100%
|
250−260
+100%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−115%
|
140−150
+115%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
−224%
|
100−110
+224%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
−173%
|
140−150
+173%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
−166%
|
170−180
+166%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
−190%
|
160−170
+190%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
−302%
|
160−170
+302%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 85−90
−122%
|
190−200
+122%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
−287%
|
120−130
+287%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 110−120
−172%
|
300−350
+172%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
−304%
|
101
+304%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
−240%
|
65−70
+240%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
−78.5%
|
280−290
+78.5%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−155%
|
110−120
+155%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
−293%
|
55−60
+293%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
−226%
|
110−120
+226%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−244%
|
130−140
+244%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−296%
|
90−95
+296%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 35−40
−249%
|
120−130
+249%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
−358%
|
55−60
+358%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
−255%
|
100−110
+255%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
−250%
|
40−45
+250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−241%
|
75−80
+241%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−210%
|
270−280
+210%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
−217%
|
70−75
+217%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−333%
|
24−27
+333%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
−271%
|
60−65
+271%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
−237%
|
90−95
+237%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−353%
|
65−70
+353%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 16−18
−288%
|
60−65
+288%
|
This is how Arc Graphics 130T and RTX 5060 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 5060 Mobile is 207% faster in 1080p
- RTX 5060 Mobile is 214% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 5060 Mobile is 358% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RTX 5060 Mobile surpassed Arc Graphics 130T in all 54 of our tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
