Radeon HD 6540G2 vs Arc Graphics 130V
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc Graphics 130V and Radeon HD 6540G2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics 130V outperforms HD 6540G2 by a whopping 812% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 469 | 1107 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Xe² (2024) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Lunar Lake iGPU | no data |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 September 2024 (1 year ago) | 14 June 2011 (14 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 cores | 7 | 480 |
| Boost clock speed | 1850 MHz | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 3 nm | 40 nm |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
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 | LPDDR5x | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | no data |
| Shared memory | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 11 |
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.
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.
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.
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 | 34
+1033%
| 3−4
−1033%
|
| 1440p | 23
+1050%
| 2−3
−1050%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 51
+920%
|
5−6
−920%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+4700%
|
1−2
−4700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 47
+840%
|
5−6
−840%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 43
+2050%
|
2−3
−2050%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+2067%
|
3−4
−2067%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+571%
|
7−8
−571%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| Valorant | 100−105
+203%
|
30−35
−203%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+4700%
|
1−2
−4700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 25
+1150%
|
2−3
−1150%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+471%
|
27−30
−471%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+1850%
|
2−3
−1850%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+2067%
|
3−4
−2067%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+571%
|
7−8
−571%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40
+900%
|
4−5
−900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+300%
|
7−8
−300%
|
| Valorant | 100−105
+203%
|
30−35
−203%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+4700%
|
1−2
−4700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+571%
|
7−8
−571%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+300%
|
7−8
−300%
|
| Valorant | 100−105
+203%
|
30−35
−203%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 65−70
+2067%
|
3−4
−2067%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 80−85
+925%
|
8−9
−925%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70
+442%
|
12−14
−442%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+5850%
|
2−3
−5850%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+833%
|
3−4
−833%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+767%
|
3−4
−767%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
+1050%
|
2−3
−1050%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+57.1%
|
14−16
−57.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+867%
|
6−7
−867%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
Full HD
High
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how Arc Graphics 130V and HD 6540G2 compete in popular games:
- Arc Graphics 130V is 1033% faster in 1080p
- Arc Graphics 130V is 1050% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc Graphics 130V is 5850% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Arc Graphics 130V performs better in 40 tests (93%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (7%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.76 | 1.18 |
| Recency | 24 September 2024 | 14 June 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 40 nm |
Arc Graphics 130V has a 812% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 1233% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc Graphics 130V is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6540G2 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
