Arc A750 vs GMA X4500M
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 180 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 55.96 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.75 |
| Architecture | Generation 5.0 (2008) | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) |
| GPU code name | Eaglelake | DG2-512 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 October 2008 (16 years ago) | 12 October 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $289 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 80 | 3584 |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 2050 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 21,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | 537.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.064 TFLOPS | 17.2 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 1 | 112 |
| TMUs | 10 | 224 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 448 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 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 type | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 512.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.0 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 2.0 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 October 2008 | 12 October 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 225 Watt |
GMA X4500M has 1630.8% lower power consumption.
Arc A750, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GMA X4500M and Arc A750. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GMA X4500M is a notebook card while Arc A750 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
