Arc A370M vs HD Graphics 3000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 3000 with Arc A370M, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 3000
2011
0.66

Arc A370M outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 1909% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1180380
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data26.24
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT2+DG2-128
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)30 March 2022 (2 years 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 cores961024
Core clock speed650 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1300 MHz1550 MHz
Number of transistors1,160 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown35 Watt
Texture fill rate15.6099.20
Floating-point processing power0.2496 TFLOPS3.174 TFLOPS
ROPs232
TMUs1264
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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 4.0 x8
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data112.0 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

HD Graphics 3000 0.66
Arc A370M 13.26
+1909%

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.

HD Graphics 3000 254
Arc A370M 5115
+1914%

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.

HD Graphics 3000 2503
Arc A370M 35604
+1323%

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 HD9
−344%
40
+344%
1440p1−2
−2000%
21
+2000%
4K1−2
−3300%
34
+3300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1433%
46
+1433%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−800%
35−40
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1133%
37
+1133%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−4200%
40−45
+4200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−627%
80−85
+627%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−750%
50−55
+750%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−167%
80−85
+167%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−800%
35−40
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−733%
25
+733%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−4200%
40−45
+4200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−627%
80−85
+627%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−933%
62
+933%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−167%
80−85
+167%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−800%
35−40
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−600%
21
+600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−627%
80−85
+627%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−783%
53
+783%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−160%
26
+160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+100%
15
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 16−18
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Hitman 3 6−7
−217%
18−20
+217%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−4700%
95−100
+4700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−767%
24−27
+767%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 8−9

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 33
+0%
33
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20
+0%
20
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 3000 and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A370M is 344% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A370M is 2000% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A370M is 3300% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD Graphics 3000 is 100% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A370M is 4700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 3000 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Arc A370M is ahead in 34 tests (49%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.66 13.26
Recency 1 February 2011 30 March 2022
Chip lithography 32 nm 6 nm

Arc A370M has a 1909.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 433.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A370M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 3000 is a desktop card while Arc A370M 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.


Intel HD Graphics 3000
HD Graphics 3000
Intel Arc A370M
Arc A370M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.8 2372 votes

Rate HD Graphics 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 163 votes

Rate Arc A370M 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.