Radeon PRO W7700 vs Arc A310

Place in the ranking	363	61
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	55.87
Power efficiency	13.14	18.16
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	DG2-128	Navi 32
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)	13 November 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	768	3072
Core clock speed	2000 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	2000 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	64.00	499.2
Floating-point processing power	3.072 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	32	192
Tensor Cores	96	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	6	48

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).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1937 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	124.0 GB/s	576.0 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 Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.6	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.3	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.

Arc A310 14.23

PRO W7700 49.83
+250%

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.

Arc A310 5492

PRO W7700 19227
+250%

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

−242%

130−140
+242%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

7.68

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −250%	140−150 +250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 −233%	100−105 +233%
Battlefield 5	55−60 −239%	200−210 +239%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −233%	120−130 +233%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −233%	140−150 +233%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −233%	160−170 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −210%	350−400 +210%
Hitman 3	35−40 −243%	120−130 +243%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −241%	300−310 +241%
Metro Exodus	60−65 −239%	210−220 +239%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −247%	170−180 +247%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 −239%	200−210 +239%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −249%	300−310 +249%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −250%	140−150 +250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 −233%	100−105 +233%
Battlefield 5	55−60 −239%	200−210 +239%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −233%	120−130 +233%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −233%	140−150 +233%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −233%	160−170 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −210%	350−400 +210%
Hitman 3	35−40 −243%	120−130 +243%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −241%	300−310 +241%
Metro Exodus	60−65 −239%	210−220 +239%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −247%	170−180 +247%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65 −238%	220−230 +238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −241%	140−150 +241%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −249%	300−310 +249%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −250%	140−150 +250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 −233%	100−105 +233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −233%	120−130 +233%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −233%	140−150 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −210%	350−400 +210%
Hitman 3	35−40 −243%	120−130 +243%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −241%	300−310 +241%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	54 −233%	180−190 +233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	29 −245%	100−105 +245%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −249%	300−310 +249%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50
−247%

170−180

+247%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −224%	110−120 +224%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −233%	90−95 +233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 −233%	60−65 +233%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −244%	55−60 +244%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −250%	70−75 +250%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −233%	70−75 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 −206%	300−310 +206%
Hitman 3	21−24 −233%	70−75 +233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −233%	120−130 +233%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −233%	110−120 +233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −243%	120−130 +243%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −250%	70−75 +250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 −224%	350−400 +224%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
−245%

100−105

+245%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −233%	60−65 +233%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −246%	45−50 +246%
Hitman 3	12−14 −246%	45−50 +246%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 −226%	300−310 +226%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −233%	60−65 +233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −233%	60−65 +233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 −233%	30−33 +233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −233%	30−33 +233%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −233%	80−85 +233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −242%	65−70 +242%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −243%	24−27 +243%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−244%

55−60
+244%

This is how Arc A310 and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 242% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.23	49.83
Recency	12 October 2022	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	190 Watt

Arc A310 has 153.3% lower power consumption.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has a 250.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A310 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A310 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.