Arc A770 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti

Place in the ranking	328	154
Place by popularity	5	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	13.97	54.95
Power efficiency	15.22	10.47
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GP107	DG2-512
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 October 2016 (8 years ago)	12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$139	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A770 has 293% better value for money than GTX 1050 Ti.

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	768	4096
Core clock speed	1291 MHz	2100 MHz
Boost clock speed	1392 MHz	2400 MHz
Number of transistors	3,300 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	225 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	97 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	66.82	614.4
Floating-point processing power	2.138 TFLOPS	19.66 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	128
TMUs	48	256
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	145 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	7008 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	112 GB/s	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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	1x 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.

VR Ready	+	no data
Ansel	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
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.

GTX 1050 Ti 16.37

Arc A770 33.79
+106%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 1050 Ti 6316

Arc A770 13035
+106%

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.

GTX 1050 Ti 9453

Arc A770 41303
+337%

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.

GTX 1050 Ti 7485

Arc A770 32666
+336%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1050 Ti 50939

Arc A770 139166
+173%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1050 Ti 352876

Arc A770 628292
+78%

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 HD	50 −136%	118 +136%
1440p	29 −131%	67 +131%
4K	25 −68%	42 +68%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.78	2.79
1440p	4.79	4.91
4K	5.56	7.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

24−27

−61.5%

40−45
+61.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	48 −35.4%	65 +35.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 −241%	92 +241%
Battlefield 5	53 −60.4%	85−90 +60.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−35 −60.6%	50−55 +60.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −61.5%	40−45 +61.5%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −55.3%	55−60 +55.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 −52.3%	65−70 +52.3%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −41.9%	140−150 +41.9%
Hitman 3	30−35 −67.7%	50−55 +67.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	80−85 −43.9%	110−120 +43.9%
Metro Exodus	56 −157%	144 +157%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −48.9%	65−70 +48.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80 −10%	85−90 +10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	80−85 −28%	100−110 +28%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	64 +106%	31 −106%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 −193%	79 +193%
Battlefield 5	44 −93.2%	85−90 +93.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−35 −60.6%	50−55 +60.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −61.5%	40−45 +61.5%
Far Cry 5	35 −68.6%	55−60 +68.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	41 −63.4%	65−70 +63.4%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −41.9%	140−150 +41.9%
Hitman 3	30−35 −67.7%	50−55 +67.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	80−85 −43.9%	110−120 +43.9%
Metro Exodus	46 −213%	144 +213%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −48.9%	65−70 +48.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	50 −416%	258 +416%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −47.4%	55−60 +47.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	80−85 −28%	100−110 +28%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24 −87.5%	45 +87.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 −167%	72 +167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−35 −60.6%	50−55 +60.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −61.5%	40−45 +61.5%
Far Cry 5	27 −119%	55−60 +119%
Forza Horizon 4	45 +95.7%	23 −95.7%
Hitman 3	30−35 −67.7%	50−55 +67.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45 −169%	121 +169%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	43 −402%	216 +402%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	26 −177%	72 +177%
Watch Dogs: Legion	80−85 +10.8%	74 −10.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50

−48.9%

65−70
+48.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −53.1%	45−50 +53.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −56%	35−40 +56%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 −150%	40 +150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 −329%	60 +329%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −61.1%	27−30 +61.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −88.9%	16−18 +88.9%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −57.9%	30−33 +57.9%
Forza Horizon 4	75 −97.3%	140−150 +97.3%
Hitman 3	18−20 −63.2%	30−35 +63.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	32 −213%	100 +213%
Metro Exodus	29 −214%	91 +214%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30 −427%	158 +427%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −233%	60 +233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 −46.5%	140−150 +46.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30

−59.3%

40−45
+59.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −56.3%	24−27 +56.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%
Hitman 3	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	80−85 −59%	130−140 +59%
Metro Exodus	14 −493%	83 +493%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −356%	73 +356%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −233%	30 +233%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −375%	38 +375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −87.5%	14−16 +87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Forza Horizon 4	20 +150%	8 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	17 −424%	89 +424%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −429%	37 +429%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−46.7%

21−24
+46.7%

This is how GTX 1050 Ti and Arc A770 compete in popular games:

Arc A770 is 136% faster in 1080p
Arc A770 is 131% faster in 1440p
Arc A770 is 68% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1050 Ti is 150% faster.
in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A770 is 493% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1050 Ti is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
Arc A770 is ahead in 68 tests (94%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.37	33.79
Recency	25 October 2016	12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	225 Watt

GTX 1050 Ti has 200% lower power consumption.

Arc A770, on the other hand, has a 106.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.