Arc A750 vs GRID M3-3020

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M3-3020 with Arc A750, including specs and performance data.

GRID M3-3020
2016
4 GB GDDR5
7.66

Arc A750 outperforms GRID M3-3020 by a whopping 307% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking523177
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data55.59
Power efficiencyno data9.63
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGM107DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date18 May 2016 (8 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores6403584
Core clock speed1033 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speed1306 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data225 Watt
Texture fill rate52.24537.6
Floating-point processing power1.672 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs16112
TMUs40224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s512.0 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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA5.0-

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 HD24−27
−350%
108
+350%
1440p14−16
−314%
58
+314%
4K8−9
−338%
35
+338%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.68
1440pno data4.98
4Kno data8.26

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62
+0%
62
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90
+0%
90
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 144
+0%
144
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 106
+0%
106
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 76
+0%
76
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 143
+0%
143
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 239
+0%
239
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45
+0%
45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 69
+0%
69
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 113
+0%
113
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 199
+0%
199
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 63
+0%
63
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+0%
38
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 54
+0%
54
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Hitman 3 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 92
+0%
92
+0%
Metro Exodus 86
+0%
86
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 145
+0%
145
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 80
+0%
80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 28
+0%
28
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30
+0%
30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 84
+0%
84
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how GRID M3-3020 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 350% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 314% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A750 is 338% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.66 31.14
Recency 18 May 2016 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm

Arc A750 has a 306.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M3-3020 in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID M3-3020 is a workstation graphics 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.

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.


NVIDIA GRID M3-3020
GRID M3-3020
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.


5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 810 votes

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.