Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs GeForce 610M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 610M and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 610M
2011
1 GB DDR3, 12 Watt
0.75

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms 610M by a whopping 1311% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1155433
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.36no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameGF119Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 December 2011 (12 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year 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 cores484
Core clock speed738 MHzno data
Boost clock speed900 MHz1950 MHz
Number of transistors292 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Wattno data
Texture fill rate5.904no data
Floating-point processing power0.1417 TFLOPSno data
Video decodersH.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080pno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data

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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width64bitno data
Memory clock speed900 MHzno data
Memory bandwidthUp to 14.4 GB/sno data
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 outputsno data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12_2
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

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.

GeForce 610M 0.75
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 10.58
+1311%

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.

GeForce 610M 508
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 6726
+1225%

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 HD1−2
−2600%
27
+2600%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−360%
21−24
+360%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−350%
50−55
+350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 27−30
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−433%
30−35
+433%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−100%
60−65
+100%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−360%
21−24
+360%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−350%
50−55
+350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 27−30
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−550%
39
+550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−160%
24−27
+160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−100%
60−65
+100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−360%
21−24
+360%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Hitman 3 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−350%
50−55
+350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−400%
30
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−60%
16
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−100%
60−65
+100%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 27−30

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 18−20
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 9−10
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Hitman 3 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−3000%
60−65
+3000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 7−8

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 4−5
Far Cry 5 0−1 5−6

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GeForce 610M and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 2600% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 3000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is ahead in 30 tests (52%)
  • there's a draw in 28 tests (48%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 10.58
Recency 1 December 2011 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 1310.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 610M in performance tests.


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 GeForce 610M
GeForce 610M
Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

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.


3.2 740 votes

Rate GeForce 610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 7 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.