Arc A380 vs Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile with Arc A380, including specs and performance data.

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile
2018
3 MB GDDR5
12.28

Arc A380 outperforms Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking408341
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data44.43
Power efficiencyno data14.92
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameno dataDG2-128
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release dateApril 2018 (6 years ago)14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores7681024
Core clock speed1366 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed1442 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistorsno data7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data131.2
Floating-point processing powerno data4.198 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data222 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 amount3 MB6 GB
Memory bus width96 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth84 GB/s186.0 GB/s

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 data1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

Multi-Projection+no data
Multi Monitor+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXno data12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan+1.3
DLSS-+

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.

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 12.28
Arc A380 16.04
+30.6%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 6401
Arc A380 10174
+58.9%

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 HD35−40
−40%
49
+40%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.04

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 65
+0%
65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+0%
41
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 48
+0%
48
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 33
+0%
33
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 76
+0%
76
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 32
+0%
32
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 31
+0%
31
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 29
+0%
29
+0%
Far Cry 5 57
+0%
57
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 72
+0%
72
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 33
+0%
33
+0%
Metro Exodus 40
+0%
40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 66
+0%
66
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 57
+0%
57
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+0%
34
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A380 is 40% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.28 16.04
Maximum RAM amount 3 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm

Arc A380 has a 30.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 204700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile is a notebook card while Arc A380 is a desktop one.

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 GTX 1050 3GB Mobile
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 125 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 871 vote

Rate Arc A380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile or Arc A380, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.