Arc A750 vs GMA 3000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance rankingnot rated177
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data54.98
ArchitectureGeneration 4.0 (2006−2007)no data
GPU code nameBroadwaterDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 June 2006 (18 years ago)12 October 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 coresno data3584
Core clock speed400 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate1.600537.6

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 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared16000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 June 2006 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 90 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 225 Watt

GMA 3000 has 1630.8% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GMA 3000 and Arc A750. We've got no test results to judge.


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 GMA 3000
GMA 3000
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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.


2.6 45 votes

Rate GMA 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 761 vote

Rate Arc A750 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.