Arc A310 vs FirePro A320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance rankingnot rated367
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Xe HPG (2022−2023)
GPU code nameTrinity GLAlchemist
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date6 June 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2022 (2 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3846
Core clock speed800 MHzno data
Boost clock speed955 MHz2000 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt75 Watt (40 - 75 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate22.9264.00
Floating-point performance0.7334 gflops3.072 gflops

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 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared15500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data124.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 June 2012 1 September 2022
Chip lithography 32 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 75 Watt

Arc A310 has an age advantage of 10 years, a 433.3% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro A320 and Arc A310. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FirePro A320 is a workstation card while Arc A310 is a notebook 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.


AMD FirePro A320
FirePro A320
Intel Arc A310
Arc A310

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.


3 2 votes

Rate FirePro A320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 239 votes

Rate Arc A310 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.