Arc A380 vs Arc A370M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A370M with Arc A380, including specs and performance data.

Arc A370M
2022
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
12.22

A380 outperforms A370M by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking438383
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data38.84
Power efficiency26.8315.39
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameDG2-128DG2-128
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date30 March 2022 (3 years ago)14 June 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores10241024
Core clock speed300 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed1550 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate99.20131.2
Floating-point processing power3.174 TFLOPS4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6464
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Cores88
L1 Cache1.5 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MB4 MB

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 4.0 x8
Lengthno data222 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.0 GB/s186.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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 A370M 12.22
Arc A380 15.02
+22.9%

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

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 A370M 5115
Samples: 2
Arc A380 6286
+22.9%
Samples: 505

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 A370M 12090
Arc A380 13892
+14.9%

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 A370M 8149
Arc A380 10174
+24.8%

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 A370M 35604
Arc A380 60804
+70.8%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Intel Core i5-2300 satisfies 82% minimum and 73% recommended requirements of all games known to us.
  • 0
  • 50
  • 100

Minimum

  • 0
  • 50
  • 100

Recommended

AMD A6-3600 satisfies 69% minimum and 59% recommended requirements of all games known to us.
  • 0
  • 50
  • 100

Minimum

  • 0
  • 50
  • 100

Recommended

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD39
−20.5%
47
+20.5%
1440p20
−20%
24−27
+20%
4K34
−17.6%
40−45
+17.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.17
1440pno data6.21
4Kno data3.73

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low
  • Full HD
    Medium
  • Full HD
    High
  • Full HD
    Ultra
  • Full HD
    Epic
  • 1440p
    High
  • 1440p
    Ultra
  • 1440p
    Epic
  • 4K
    High
  • 4K
    Ultra
  • 4K
    Epic
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−165%
183
+165%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+12.2%
41
−12.2%
Battlefield 5 50−55
−22.2%
65−70
+22.2%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−76.8%
122
+76.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
+12.1%
33
−12.1%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
−21.6%
60−65
+21.6%
Far Cry 5 49
−26.5%
62
+26.5%
Fortnite 70−75
−19.4%
85−90
+19.4%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−43.4%
76
+43.4%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−89.5%
72
+89.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−26.7%
55−60
+26.7%
Valorant 100−110
−14.7%
120−130
+14.7%
Battlefield 5 50−55
−22.2%
65−70
+22.2%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+21.1%
57
−21.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
−14.8%
200−210
+14.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
−16%
29
+16%
Dota 2 68
−17.6%
80−85
+17.6%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
−21.6%
60−65
+21.6%
Far Cry 5 46
−23.9%
57
+23.9%
Fortnite 70−75
−19.4%
85−90
+19.4%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−35.8%
72
+35.8%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−68.4%
64
+68.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
−13.8%
33
+13.8%
Metro Exodus 34
−17.6%
40
+17.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−26.7%
55−60
+26.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
−24.5%
66
+24.5%
Valorant 100−110
−14.7%
120−130
+14.7%
Battlefield 5 50−55
−22.2%
65−70
+22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
−23.8%
26
+23.8%
Dota 2 66
−21.2%
80−85
+21.2%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
−21.6%
60−65
+21.6%
Far Cry 5 43
−20.9%
52
+20.9%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−7.5%
57
+7.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−26.7%
55−60
+26.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
−30.8%
34
+30.8%
Valorant 100−110
−14.7%
120−130
+14.7%
Fortnite 70−75
−19.4%
85−90
+19.4%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
−21.5%
110−120
+21.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
−127%
24−27
+127%
Metro Exodus 20
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
−51%
140−150
+51%
Valorant 130−140
−16.7%
150−160
+16.7%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−26.5%
40−45
+26.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Escape from Tarkov 24−27
−24%
30−35
+24%
Far Cry 5 29
−17.2%
30−35
+17.2%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−23.3%
35−40
+23.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−22.2%
21−24
+22.2%
Fortnite 27−30
−25.9%
30−35
+25.9%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
−16.7%
27−30
+16.7%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
Valorant 65−70
−25.4%
80−85
+25.4%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−29.4%
21−24
+29.4%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Dota 2 40
−12.5%
45−50
+12.5%
Escape from Tarkov 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−30.8%
16−18
+30.8%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−23.8%
24−27
+23.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Fortnite 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%

This is how Arc A370M and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A380 is 21% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A380 is 20% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A380 is 18% 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 A370M is 21% faster.
  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Arc A380 is 165% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A370M performs better in 4 tests (7%)
  • Arc A380 performs better in 57 tests (93%)

Select a game to check i5-2300 and A6-3600 in:


Official system requirements

Reviewed processors performance compared to Fortnite system requirements.

i5-2300
+103%
A6-3600
recommended
Core i5-7300U

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.22 15.02
Recency 30 March 2022 14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 75 Watt

Arc A370M has 114.3% lower power consumption.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has a 22.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A370M in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A370M is a notebook graphics card while Arc A380 is a desktop 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 A370M
Arc A370M
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

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.


3.5
188 votes

Rate Arc A370M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5
945 votes

Rate Arc A380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc A370M or Arc A380, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.