Arc A530M vs GeForce MX230

Place in the ranking	642	325
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	34.79	18.70
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	GP108	DG2-256
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	21 February 2019 (5 years ago)	1 August 2023 (1 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 cores	256	1536
Core clock speed	1519 MHz	900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	1300 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	11,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.31	124.8
Floating-point processing power	0.81 TFLOPS	3.994 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	48
TMUs	16	96
Tensor Cores	no data	192
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	224.0 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

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

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.

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.

GeForce MX230 4.75

Arc A530M 16.60
+249%

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.

GeForce MX230 1834

Arc A530M 6405
+249%

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

−248%

80−85
+248%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

8−9
+300%

2−3

−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 +333%	3−4 −333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Battlefield 5	19 −242%	65−70 +242%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Far Cry 5	14 −221%	45−50 +221%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 −224%	55−60 +224%
Forza Horizon 4	59 −239%	200−210 +239%
Hitman 3	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +288%	8−9 −288%
Metro Exodus	18 −233%	60−65 +233%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −246%	45−50 +246%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	23 +475%	4−5 −475%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +60.7%	27−30 −60.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 +433%	3−4 −433%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Battlefield 5	13 −246%	45−50 +246%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	13 +550%	2−3 −550%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Far Cry 5	12 −233%	40−45 +233%
Far Cry New Dawn	12 −233%	40−45 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	53 −240%	180−190 +240%
Hitman 3	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +288%	8−9 −288%
Metro Exodus	13 −246%	45−50 +246%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −246%	45−50 +246%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +60.7%	27−30 −60.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6 +100%	3−4 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9 +350%	2−3 −350%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Far Cry 5	7 −243%	24−27 +243%
Forza Horizon 4	12 −233%	40−45 +233%
Hitman 3	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +288%	8−9 −288%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9 +0%	9−10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +60.7%	27−30 −60.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−246%

45−50
+246%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −233%	30−33 +233%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −243%	24−27 +243%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −233%	100−105 +233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+350%

2−3

−350%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Hitman 3	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+150%

2−3

−150%

This is how GeForce MX230 and Arc A530M compete in popular games:

Arc A530M is 248% faster in 1080p

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX230 is 600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce MX230 is ahead in 28 tests (97%)
there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.75	16.60
Recency	21 February 2019	1 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	65 Watt

GeForce MX230 has 550% lower power consumption.

Arc A530M, on the other hand, has a 249.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A530M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX230 in performance tests.

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