Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS vs Arc A310

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A310 with Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, including specs and performance data.

Arc A310
2022
4 GB GDDR6, 75 Watt
14.27
+32%

Arc A310 outperforms Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking368428
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.1024.82
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)no data
GPU code nameDG2-128no data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2022 (2 years ago)no data (2024 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 cores7681536
Core clock speed2000 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2000 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology6 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate64.00no data
Floating-point processing power3.072 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data
Tensor Cores96no data
Ray Tracing Cores6no data

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 4.0 x8no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR6LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1937 MHz8448 MHz
Memory bandwidth124.0 GB/sno data
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 data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12_1
Shader Model6.6no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-

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.

Arc A310 14.27
+32%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 10.81

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.

Arc A310 11915
+87.8%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 6346

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.

Arc A310 8464
+34.5%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 6294

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.

Arc A310 53244
+52.6%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 34890

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Arc A310 3269
+90.9%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 1712

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 HD37
+8.8%
34
−8.8%
1440p21−24
+23.5%
17
−23.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+32.9%
85−90
−32.9%
Hitman 3 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+32.3%
65−70
−32.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+32.9%
85−90
−32.9%
Hitman 3 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65
+44.4%
45−50
−44.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+36.7%
30−33
−36.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+32.3%
65−70
−32.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+32.9%
85−90
−32.9%
Hitman 3 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+35.4%
65−70
−35.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 54
+35%
40−45
−35%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+32.3%
65−70
−32.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+40%
70−75
−40%
Hitman 3 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+35%
80−85
−35%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Hitman 3 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+41.5%
65−70
−41.5%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

This is how Arc A310 and Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS compete in popular games:

  • Arc A310 is 9% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A310 is 24% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.27 10.81
Chip lithography 6 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 30 Watt

Arc A310 has a 32% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, on the other hand, has a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Arc A310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A310 is a desktop card while Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is a notebook 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 Arc A310
Arc A310
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS

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.


3.7 254 votes

Rate Arc A310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 10 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS 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.