Radeon PRO W7800 vs Arc A770

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A770 with Radeon PRO W7800, including specs and performance data.

Arc A770
2022
16 GB GDDR6, 225 Watt
33.93

PRO W7800 outperforms Arc A770 by a whopping 117% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking15516
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation55.3229.91
Power efficiency10.3319.45
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameDG2-512Navi 31
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date12 October 2022 (2 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 $2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A770 has 85% better value for money than PRO W7800.

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 cores40964480
Core clock speed2100 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speed2400 MHz2499 MHz
Number of transistors21,700 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate614.4699.7
Floating-point processing power19.66 TFLOPS44.78 TFLOPS
ROPs128128
TMUs256280
Tensor Cores512no data
Ray Tracing Cores3270

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
Lengthno data280 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 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 amount16 GB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s576.0 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 2.03x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
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 Model6.66.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
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 A770 33.93
PRO W7800 73.79
+117%

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 A770 13075
PRO W7800 28439
+118%

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 HD116
−116%
250−260
+116%
1440p65
−115%
140−150
+115%
4K41
−107%
85−90
+107%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.8410.00
1440p5.0617.85
4K8.0229.40

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−114%
90−95
+114%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65
−115%
140−150
+115%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 92
−117%
200−210
+117%
Battlefield 5 85−90
−112%
180−190
+112%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−108%
110−120
+108%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−114%
90−95
+114%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−103%
120−130
+103%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
−109%
140−150
+109%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−101%
300−310
+101%
Hitman 3 50−55
−112%
110−120
+112%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
−112%
250−260
+112%
Metro Exodus 144
−108%
300−310
+108%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−109%
140−150
+109%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
−116%
190−200
+116%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
−110%
220−230
+110%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
−110%
65−70
+110%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 79
−115%
170−180
+115%
Battlefield 5 85−90
−112%
180−190
+112%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−108%
110−120
+108%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−114%
90−95
+114%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−103%
120−130
+103%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
−109%
140−150
+109%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−101%
300−310
+101%
Hitman 3 50−55
−112%
110−120
+112%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
−112%
250−260
+112%
Metro Exodus 144
−108%
300−310
+108%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−109%
140−150
+109%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 258
−113%
550−600
+113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−114%
120−130
+114%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
−110%
220−230
+110%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45
−111%
95−100
+111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 72
−108%
150−160
+108%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−108%
110−120
+108%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−114%
90−95
+114%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−103%
120−130
+103%
Forza Horizon 4 23
−117%
50−55
+117%
Hitman 3 50−55
−112%
110−120
+112%
Horizon Zero Dawn 121
−115%
260−270
+115%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 216
−108%
450−500
+108%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
−108%
150−160
+108%
Watch Dogs: Legion 74
−116%
160−170
+116%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−109%
140−150
+109%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
−104%
100−105
+104%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−105%
80−85
+105%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40
−113%
85−90
+113%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60
−117%
130−140
+117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−107%
60−65
+107%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Far Cry 5 30−33
−117%
65−70
+117%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−103%
300−310
+103%
Hitman 3 30−35
−110%
65−70
+110%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100
−110%
210−220
+110%
Metro Exodus 91
−109%
190−200
+109%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 158
−89.9%
300−310
+89.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
−117%
130−140
+117%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
−107%
300−310
+107%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−109%
90−95
+109%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
−100%
40−45
+100%
Hitman 3 20−22
−100%
40−45
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
−112%
280−290
+112%
Metro Exodus 83
−117%
180−190
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
−105%
150−160
+105%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30
−117%
65−70
+117%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 38
−111%
80−85
+111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Forza Horizon 4 8
−100%
16−18
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 89
−113%
190−200
+113%
Watch Dogs: Legion 37
−116%
80−85
+116%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%

This is how Arc A770 and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7800 is 116% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7800 is 115% faster in 1440p
  • PRO W7800 is 107% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.93 73.79
Recency 12 October 2022 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 260 Watt

Arc A770 has 15.6% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 117.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A770 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A770 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation one.


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 A770
Arc A770
AMD Radeon PRO W7800
Radeon PRO W7800

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.


4.8 5287 votes

Rate Arc A770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 35 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 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.