Radeon PRO W7700 vs Arc A750

Place in the ranking	175	61
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	55.10	55.87
Power efficiency	9.54	18.16
Architecture	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	DG2-512	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)	$289	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7700 has 1% better value for money than Arc A750.

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	3584	3072
Core clock speed	2050 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	2400 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	21,700 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	537.6	499.2
Floating-point processing power	17.2 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	112	96
TMUs	224	192
Tensor Cores	448	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	28	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 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512.0 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	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0	4x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	+	-

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 A750 31.01

PRO W7700 49.83
+60.7%

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 A750 11967

PRO W7700 19227
+60.7%

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	111 −53.2%	170−180 +53.2%
1440p	63 −58.7%	100−110 +58.7%
4K	36 −52.8%	55−60 +52.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.60	5.88
1440p	4.59	9.99
4K	8.03	18.16

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	62 −53.2%	95−100 +53.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	90 −55.6%	140−150 +55.6%
Battlefield 5	140−150 −56%	220−230 +56%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 −59.1%	140−150 +59.1%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −52.2%	140−150 +52.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 −57.4%	170−180 +57.4%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 −48.5%	300−310 +48.5%
Hitman 3	90−95 −59.6%	150−160 +59.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	170−180 −57.3%	280−290 +57.3%
Metro Exodus	144 −59.7%	230−240 +59.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 −51.5%	150−160 +51.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	160−170 −57.6%	260−270 +57.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 −55.6%	210−220 +55.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	106 −60.4%	170−180 +60.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	76 −57.9%	120−130 +57.9%
Battlefield 5	140−150 −56%	220−230 +56%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 −59.1%	140−150 +59.1%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −52.2%	140−150 +52.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 −57.4%	170−180 +57.4%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 −48.5%	300−310 +48.5%
Hitman 3	90−95 −59.6%	150−160 +59.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	170−180 −57.3%	280−290 +57.3%
Metro Exodus	143 −53.8%	220−230 +53.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 −51.5%	150−160 +51.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	239 −46.4%	350−400 +46.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 −53.8%	140−150 +53.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 −55.6%	210−220 +55.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	69 −59.4%	110−120 +59.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 −59.1%	140−150 +59.1%
Far Cry 5	90−95 −52.2%	140−150 +52.2%
Forza Horizon 4	90 −55.6%	140−150 +55.6%
Hitman 3	90−95 −59.6%	150−160 +59.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	113 −59.3%	180−190 +59.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	199 −50.8%	300−310 +50.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	69 −59.4%	110−120 +59.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	63 −58.7%	100−105 +58.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

95−100
−51.5%

150−160

+51.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −51.2%	130−140 +51.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 −49.3%	100−105 +49.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	38 −57.9%	60−65 +57.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	54 −57.4%	85−90 +57.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 −53.8%	80−85 +53.8%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −56.9%	80−85 +56.9%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 −46.4%	350−400 +46.4%
Hitman 3	55−60 −55.2%	90−95 +55.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	92 −52.2%	140−150 +52.2%
Metro Exodus	86 −51.2%	130−140 +51.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	145 −58.6%	230−240 +58.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	57 −57.9%	90−95 +57.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	200−210 −47.1%	300−310 +47.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

75−80
−57.9%

120−130

+57.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 −57.9%	60−65 +57.9%
Hitman 3	35−40 −52.8%	55−60 +52.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	190−200 −54.6%	300−310 +54.6%
Metro Exodus	80 −50%	120−130 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	69 −59.4%	110−120 +59.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	28 −42.9%	40−45 +42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30 −50%	45−50 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 −55.2%	45−50 +55.2%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%
Forza Horizon 4	61 −55.7%	95−100 +55.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	84 −54.8%	130−140 +54.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30 −50%	45−50 +50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45

−50%

60−65
+50%

This is how Arc A750 and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 53% faster in 1080p
PRO W7700 is 59% faster in 1440p
PRO W7700 is 53% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	31.01	49.83
Recency	12 October 2022	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	225 Watt	190 Watt

PRO W7700 has a 60.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 18.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A750 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A750 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.