Arc A350M vs GeForce GTX 770

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 670 GTX 680 GTX 760 GTX 770
VS
Arc A350M Arc A370M Arc A380M Arc A530M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 770 with Arc A350M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 770
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 230 Watt
15.40
+5.3%

GTX 770 outperforms Arc A350M by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GTX 770 GTX 770
Arc A350M Arc A350M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking347359
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.25no data
Power efficiency4.6140.28
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGK104DG2-128
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)30 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

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 cores1536768
Core clock speed1046 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1085 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt25 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature98 °Cno data
Texture fill rate138.955.20
Floating-point processing power3.333 TFLOPS1.766 TFLOPS
ROPs3224
TMUs12848
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Minimum recommended system power600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.3 GB/s112.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
PhysX+-
3D Vision Live+-

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
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
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 770 15.40
+5.3%
Arc A350M 14.63

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 770 8150
+14%
Arc A350M 7147

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
+0%
35
+0%
1440p16−18
+0%
16
+0%
4K8−9
+0%
8
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.40no data
1440p24.94no data
4K49.88no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+0%
27
+0%
Elden Ring 22
+0%
22
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 66
+0%
66
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 56
+0%
56
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8
+0%
8
+0%
Dota 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Elden Ring 42
+0%
42
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 53
+0%
53
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
+0%
26
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
World of Tanks 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45
+0%
45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 10
+0%
10
+0%
Elden Ring 17
+0%
17
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+0%
10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+0%
37
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Elden Ring 3
+0%
3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+0%
11
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how GTX 770 and Arc A350M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • A tie in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 15.40 14.63
Recency 30 May 2013 30 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 25 Watt

GTX 770 has a 5.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc A350M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 820% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 770 and Arc A350M.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 770 is a desktop card while Arc A350M is a notebook 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 GeForce GTX 770
GeForce GTX 770
Intel Arc A350M
Arc A350M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTX 770 GeForce GTX 770
vs
R9 280X Radeon R9 280X
Arc A350M Arc A350M
vs
RX 5500M Radeon RX 5500M
GTX 770 GeForce GTX 770
vs
GTX 960 GeForce GTX 960
GTX 560 GeForce GTX 560
vs
RTX 2080 GeForce RTX 2080
GTX 860M NVIDIA GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
vs
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 860M
GT 640 GeForce GT 640
vs
Iris Graphics 5100 Iris Graphics 5100
K4100M Quadro K4100M
vs
RTX 4060 GeForce RTX 4060
GTX 770 GeForce GTX 770
vs
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
M2000M Quadro M2000M
vs
RTX 3050 Ti Max-Q GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Max-Q
M2000M Quadro M2000M
vs
GT 1030 DDR4 GeForce GT 1030 DDR4
GT 740 GeForce GT 740
vs
Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Iris Xe Graphics 80EU
GT 730 OEM GeForce GT 730 OEM
vs
ATI V4800 FirePro V4800
HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics
vs
GT 335M GeForce GT 335M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

4 1650 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 57 votes

Rate Arc A350M 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.