Radeon 880M vs Arc A350M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A350M and Radeon 880M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc A350M
2022
4 GB GDDR6, 25 Watt
14.00

880M outperforms Arc A350M by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking374291
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency39.6290.99
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025)
GPU code nameDG2-128Strix Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 March 2022 (2 years ago)15 July 2024 (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 cores768512
Core clock speed300 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million34,000 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate55.2092.80
Floating-point processing power1.766 TFLOPS2.97 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs4832
Ray Tracing Cores612

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.31.3

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.

Arc A350M 14.00
Radeon 880M 19.29
+37.8%

  • Other tests
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Time Spy Graphics

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 A350M 10730
Radeon 880M 13892
+29.5%

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 A350M 7147
Radeon 880M 8371
+17.1%

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 A350M 36315
Radeon 880M 51662
+42.3%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Arc A350M 3050
+1.5%
Radeon 880M 3006

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 HD36
+0%
36
+0%
1440p16
−37.5%
22
+37.5%
4K9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
−25%
95
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 38
+18.8%
32
−18.8%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−32.2%
75−80
+32.2%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+8.6%
70
−8.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
−111%
40−45
+111%
Far Cry 5 42
−28.6%
54
+28.6%
Fortnite 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−35.1%
75−80
+35.1%
Forza Horizon 5 50
−20%
60−65
+20%
Hogwarts Legacy 25
+0%
25
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−42%
70−75
+42%
Valorant 110−120
−22.6%
140−150
+22.6%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−32.2%
75−80
+32.2%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+94.9%
39
−94.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
−21.9%
220−230
+21.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
−150%
40−45
+150%
Dota 2 62
−37.1%
85−90
+37.1%
Far Cry 5 39
−25.6%
49
+25.6%
Fortnite 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−35.1%
75−80
+35.1%
Forza Horizon 5 47
−27.7%
60−65
+27.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
−108%
54
+108%
Hogwarts Legacy 20
+5.3%
19
−5.3%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−42%
70−75
+42%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43
−23.3%
53
+23.3%
Valorant 110−120
−22.6%
140−150
+22.6%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−32.2%
75−80
+32.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
−233%
40−45
+233%
Dota 2 59
−35.6%
80−85
+35.6%
Far Cry 5 37
−24.3%
46
+24.3%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−35.1%
75−80
+35.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+25%
12
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−42%
70−75
+42%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
−73.7%
33
+73.7%
Valorant 110−120
−22.6%
140−150
+22.6%
Fortnite 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−50%
35−40
+50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
−33.3%
130−140
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
−120%
22
+120%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−29.3%
170−180
+29.3%
Valorant 140−150
−24.5%
170−180
+24.5%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−39.5%
50−55
+39.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−50%
18−20
+50%
Far Cry 5 25
−64%
40−45
+64%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−42.4%
45−50
+42.4%
Hogwarts Legacy 10
−100%
20−22
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−45%
27−30
+45%
Fortnite 30−33
−43.3%
40−45
+43.3%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
−209%
30−35
+209%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
−80%
27−30
+80%
Valorant 70−75
−43.2%
100−110
+43.2%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−47.4%
27−30
+47.4%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Dota 2 45−50
−32.7%
65−70
+32.7%
Far Cry 5 12
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−37.5%
30−35
+37.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 3
−300%
12−14
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−46.2%
18−20
+46.2%
Fortnite 12−14
−46.2%
18−20
+46.2%

This is how Arc A350M and Radeon 880M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • Radeon 880M is 38% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 880M is 33% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A350M is 95% faster.
  • in Hogwarts Legacy, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 880M is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A350M is ahead in 5 tests (8%)
  • Radeon 880M is ahead in 57 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.00 19.29
Recency 30 March 2022 15 July 2024
Chip lithography 6 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 880M has a 37.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 880M is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A350M in performance tests.

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 A350M
Arc A350M
AMD Radeon 880M
Radeon 880M

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
58 votes

Rate Arc A350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4
14 votes

Rate Radeon 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc A350M or Radeon 880M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.