Arc A370M vs Arc Graphics 140V

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc Graphics 140V and Arc A370M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Arc Graphics 140V
16 GB LPDDR5x
13.42
+0.9%

Arc Graphics 140V outperforms Arc A370M by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking384387
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data26.16
ArchitectureXe² (2025)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameLunar Lake iGPUDG2-128
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release dateno data30 March 2022 (2 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 cores81024
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed2050 MHz1550 MHz
Number of transistorsno data7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology3 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data99.20
Floating-point processing powerno data3.174 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeLPDDR5xGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data112.0 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-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 Graphics 140V 13.42
+0.9%
Arc A370M 13.30

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 Graphics 140V 5158
+0.8%
Arc A370M 5115

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 Graphics 140V 10688
Arc A370M 12090
+13.1%

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 Graphics 140V 9492
+16.5%
Arc A370M 8149

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 Graphics 140V 53014
+48.9%
Arc A370M 35604

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Arc Graphics 140V 4038
+3.9%
Arc A370M 3885

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 HD40
+5.3%
38
−5.3%
1440p20
−5%
21
+5%
4K40−45
+0%
40
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45
+87.5%
24−27
−87.5%
Elden Ring 40−45
+14.3%
35
−14.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+2.3%
40−45
−2.3%
Counter-Strike 2 37
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Forza Horizon 4 78
+5.4%
74
−5.4%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+2.8%
35−40
−2.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+2.3%
40−45
−2.3%
Counter-Strike 2 30
+25%
24−27
−25%
Dota 2 44
+4.8%
42
−4.8%
Elden Ring 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+45.8%
24
−45.8%
Fortnite 75−80
+1.3%
75−80
−1.3%
Forza Horizon 4 65
+4.8%
62
−4.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 43
+48.3%
29
−48.3%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+185%
13
−185%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+1%
95−100
−1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+2.5%
40−45
−2.5%
Valorant 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%
World of Tanks 170−180
+0.6%
170−180
−0.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+2.3%
40−45
−2.3%
Counter-Strike 2 25
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 57
+7.5%
53
−7.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+1%
95−100
−1%
Valorant 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 18
+63.6%
11
−63.6%
Elden Ring 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+72.7%
11
−72.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 95−100
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−15.6%
37
+15.6%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+3.6%
27−30
−3.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 19
+0%
19
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Dota 2 66
+0%
66
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%

This is how Arc Graphics 140V and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 140V is 5% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A370M is 5% faster in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc Graphics 140V is 185% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A370M is 16% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 140V is ahead in 29 tests (46%)
  • Arc A370M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 33 tests (52%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.42 13.30
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 3 nm 6 nm

Arc Graphics 140V has a 0.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Arc Graphics 140V and Arc A370M.


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 Graphics 140V
Arc Graphics 140V
Intel Arc A370M
Arc A370M

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.


4 9 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 166 votes

Rate Arc A370M 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.