T400 4 GB vs Arc A350M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A350M with T400 4 GB, including specs and performance data.

Arc A350M
2022
4 GB GDDR6, 25 Watt
13.47
+47.2%

Arc A350M outperforms T400 4 GB by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking374473
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency39.5922.38
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameDG2-128TU117
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date30 March 2022 (3 years ago)6 May 2021 (3 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 cores768384
Core clock speed300 MHz420 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHz1425 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate55.2034.20
Floating-point processing power1.766 TFLOPS1.094 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs4824
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 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s80 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 ConnectorsNo outputs3x mini-DisplayPort

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.66.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.2
CUDA-7.5

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
+50%
24−27
−50%
1440p16
+60%
10−12
−60%
4K9
+50%
6−7
−50%

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
+52%
50−55
−52%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+50%
18−20
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 38
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+52%
50−55
−52%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Far Cry 5 42
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%
Fortnite 75−80
+56%
50−55
−56%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+62.9%
35−40
−62.9%
Forza Horizon 5 50
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 25
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Valorant 110−120
+53.3%
75−80
−53.3%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+52%
50−55
−52%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+55.8%
120−130
−55.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+60%
10−11
−60%
Dota 2 62
+55%
40−45
−55%
Far Cry 5 39
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Fortnite 75−80
+56%
50−55
−56%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+62.9%
35−40
−62.9%
Forza Horizon 5 47
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 20
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Valorant 110−120
+53.3%
75−80
−53.3%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+50%
8−9
−50%
Dota 2 59
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Far Cry 5 37
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+62.9%
35−40
−62.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+50%
10−11
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Valorant 110−120
+53.3%
75−80
−53.3%
Fortnite 75−80
+56%
50−55
−56%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+56.9%
65−70
−56.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+47.8%
90−95
−47.8%
Valorant 140−150
+50.5%
95−100
−50.5%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Far Cry 5 25
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Fortnite 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+50%
10−11
−50%
Valorant 70−75
+48%
50−55
−48%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 45−50
+63.3%
30−33
−63.3%
Far Cry 5 12
+50%
8−9
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 3
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Fortnite 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%

This is how Arc A350M and T400 4 GB compete in popular games:

  • Arc A350M is 50% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A350M is 60% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A350M is 50% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.47 9.15
Recency 30 March 2022 6 May 2021
Chip lithography 6 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 30 Watt

Arc A350M has a 47.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

The Arc A350M is our recommended choice as it beats the T400 4 GB in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A350M is a notebook card while T400 4 GB is a workstation one.

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
NVIDIA T400 4 GB
T400 4 GB

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
67 votes

Rate T400 4 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc A350M or T400 4 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.