Arc A750 vs Arc A580

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A580 and Arc A750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc A580
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 175 Watt
30.41

Arc A750 outperforms Arc A580 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking184177
Place by popularity67not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data56.31
Power efficiency11.919.57
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameDG2-512DG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date10 October 2023 (1 year ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

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 cores30723584
Core clock speed1700 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speed2000 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors21,700 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)175 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate384.0537.6
Floating-point processing power12.29 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs96112
TMUs192224
Tensor Cores384448
Ray Tracing Cores2428

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.01x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
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. 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 A580 30.41
Arc A750 31.41
+3.3%

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 A580 11717
Arc A750 12102
+3.3%

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 A580 35210
Arc A750 37288
+5.9%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Arc A580 95677
Arc A750 98837
+3.3%

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 A580 27574
Arc A750 29667
+7.6%

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 A580 113974
Arc A750 130715
+14.7%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Arc A580 593548
Arc A750 634482
+6.9%

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 HD103
−4.9%
108
+4.9%
1440p54
−7.4%
58
+7.4%
4K32
−9.4%
35
+9.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.68
1440pno data4.98
4Kno data8.26

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 103
+66.1%
62
−66.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
−5.9%
90
+5.9%
Battlefield 5 130−140
−6%
140−150
+6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
−4.8%
85−90
+4.8%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−3.4%
90−95
+3.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
−5.9%
100−110
+5.9%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
−2.5%
200−210
+2.5%
Hitman 3 85−90
−5.6%
90−95
+5.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
−4.1%
170−180
+4.1%
Metro Exodus 130−140
−9.9%
144
+9.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
−4.2%
95−100
+4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 150−160
−7.1%
160−170
+7.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
−2.3%
130−140
+2.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 102
−3.9%
106
+3.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 73
−4.1%
76
+4.1%
Battlefield 5 130−140
−6%
140−150
+6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
−4.8%
85−90
+4.8%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−3.4%
90−95
+3.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
−5.9%
100−110
+5.9%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
−2.5%
200−210
+2.5%
Hitman 3 85−90
−5.6%
90−95
+5.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
−4.1%
170−180
+4.1%
Metro Exodus 130−140
−9.2%
143
+9.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
−4.2%
95−100
+4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 214
−11.7%
239
+11.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
−5.8%
90−95
+5.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
−2.3%
130−140
+2.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 64
+42.2%
45
−42.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 64
−7.8%
69
+7.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
−4.8%
85−90
+4.8%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−3.4%
90−95
+3.4%
Forza Horizon 4 87
−3.4%
90
+3.4%
Hitman 3 85−90
−5.6%
90−95
+5.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 109
−3.7%
113
+3.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 177
−12.4%
199
+12.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
−1.5%
69
+1.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60
−5%
63
+5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
−4.2%
95−100
+4.2%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
−6.2%
85−90
+6.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−4.7%
65−70
+4.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+42.1%
38
−42.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
−5.9%
54
+5.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−6.1%
50−55
+6.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−6.3%
50−55
+6.3%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
−3.9%
230−240
+3.9%
Hitman 3 55−60
−5.5%
55−60
+5.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 87
−5.7%
92
+5.7%
Metro Exodus 91
+5.8%
86
−5.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130
−11.5%
145
+11.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
−3.6%
57
+3.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
−3%
200−210
+3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
−5.6%
75−80
+5.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−7.1%
45−50
+7.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−8.6%
35−40
+8.6%
Hitman 3 30−35
−5.9%
35−40
+5.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
−3.2%
190−200
+3.2%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−48.1%
80
+48.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 61
−13.1%
69
+13.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+25%
28
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30
+0%
30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−7.4%
27−30
+7.4%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−4%
24−27
+4%
Forza Horizon 4 56
−8.9%
61
+8.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 73
−15.1%
84
+15.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27
−11.1%
30
+11.1%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−8.1%
40−45
+8.1%

This is how Arc A580 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 5% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 7% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A750 is 9% faster in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A580 is 66% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A750 is 48% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is ahead in 5 tests (8%)
  • Arc A750 is ahead in 60 tests (91%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.41 31.41
Recency 10 October 2023 12 October 2022
Power consumption (TDP) 175 Watt 225 Watt

Arc A580 has an age advantage of 11 months, and 28.6% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 3.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Arc A580 and Arc A750.


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 A580
Arc A580
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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.


4.2 283 votes

Rate Arc A580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 852 votes

Rate Arc A750 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.