Arc Graphics 130V vs GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile

Place in the ranking	187	412
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	18.23	no data
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Xe² (2025)
GPU code name	TU106	Lunar Lake iGPU
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	29 January 2019 (5 years ago)	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 cores	1920	7
Core clock speed	960 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1200 MHz	1850 MHz
Number of transistors	10,800 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	115 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	144.0	no data
Floating-point processing power	4.608 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	48	no data
TMUs	120	no data
Tensor Cores	240	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	30	no 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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	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	GDDR6	LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	336.0 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	No outputs	no data
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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12_2
Shader Model	6.5	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

RTX 2060 Mobile 30.45
+159%

Arc Graphics 130V 11.74

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.

RTX 2060 Mobile 21262
+123%

Arc Graphics 130V 9523

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.

RTX 2060 Mobile 16331
+97.8%

Arc Graphics 130V 8255

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

RTX 2060 Mobile 6141
+89.4%

Arc Graphics 130V 3242

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	104 +225%	32 −225%
1440p	66 +175%	24−27 −175%
4K	42 +163%	16−18 −163%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +43.9%	41 −43.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +163%	24−27 −163%
Elden Ring	100−110 +203%	30−35 −203%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90 +137%	35−40 −137%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +90.3%	31 −90.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	31 +210%	10−11 −210%
Forza Horizon 4	149 +110%	71 −110%
Metro Exodus	82 +156%	30−35 −156%
Red Dead Redemption 2	100 +233%	30−33 −233%
Valorant	140 +211%	45−50 −211%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	106 +179%	35−40 −179%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +111%	28 −111%
Cyberpunk 2077	24 +167%	9−10 −167%
Dota 2	99 +141%	41 −141%
Elden Ring	100−110 +203%	30−35 −203%
Far Cry 5	70 +150%	28 −150%
Fortnite	140−150 +115%	65−70 −115%
Forza Horizon 4	123 +112%	58 −112%
Grand Theft Auto V	90 +114%	40−45 −114%
Metro Exodus	61 +90.6%	30−35 −90.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	247 +181%	85−90 −181%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45 +50%	30−33 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 +191%	35−40 −191%
Valorant	81 +80%	45−50 −80%
World of Tanks	270−280 +69.1%	160−170 −69.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	76 +100%	35−40 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +136%	25 −136%
Cyberpunk 2077	21 +163%	8−9 −163%
Dota 2	112 +180%	40−45 −180%
Far Cry 5	122 +165%	45−50 −165%
Forza Horizon 4	107 +123%	48 −123%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	84 −4.8%	85−90 +4.8%
Valorant	123 +173%	45−50 −173%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	50−55 +253%	14−16 −253%
Elden Ring	55−60 +235%	16−18 −235%
Grand Theft Auto V	50−55 +238%	16−18 −238%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +169%	65−70 −169%
Red Dead Redemption 2	29 +190%	10−11 −190%
World of Tanks	190−200 +137%	80−85 −137%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	61 +165%	21−24 −165%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +145%	10−12 −145%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +262%	24−27 −262%
Forza Horizon 4	80−85 +211%	27−30 −211%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +188%	24−27 −188%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +243%	14−16 −243%
Valorant	87 +200%	27−30 −200%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Dota 2	55−60 +150%	21−24 −150%
Elden Ring	24−27 +271%	7−8 −271%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 +150%	21−24 −150%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +243%	7−8 −243%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	98 +188%	30−35 −188%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20 +150%	8−9 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +150%	21−24 −150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	31 +182%	10−12 −182%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 +200%	2−3 −200%
Dota 2	87 +190%	30−33 −190%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +200%	14−16 −200%
Fortnite	39 +200%	12−14 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +220%	14−16 −220%
Valorant	41 +242%	12−14 −242%

This is how RTX 2060 Mobile and Arc Graphics 130V compete in popular games:

RTX 2060 Mobile is 225% faster in 1080p
RTX 2060 Mobile is 175% faster in 1440p
RTX 2060 Mobile is 163% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 2060 Mobile is 383% faster.
in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc Graphics 130V is 5% faster.

All in all, in popular games: