Arc A770M vs Quadro FX 5500

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 5500 with Arc A770M, including specs and performance data.

FX 5500
2006
1 GB GDDR3, 96 Watt
0.54

Arc A770M outperforms FX 5500 by a whopping 4844% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1213193
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.4517.65
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG71DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date20 April 2006 (18 years ago)2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 coresno data4096
Core clock speed650 MHz1650 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors278 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)96 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate15.60524.8
Floating-point processing powerno data16.79 TFLOPS
ROPs16128
TMUs24256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed505 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth32.32 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
DLSS-+

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.

FX 5500 0.54
Arc A770M 26.70
+4844%

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.

FX 5500 242
Arc A770M 11930
+4830%

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 HD1−2
−8800%
89
+8800%
1440p1−2
−5300%
54
+5300%
4K0−137

Cost per frame, $

1080p2999.00no data
1440p2999.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 113
+0%
113
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95
+0%
95
+0%
Far Cry 5 106
+0%
106
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 77
+0%
77
+0%
Dota 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 99
+0%
99
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 93
+0%
93
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 173
+0%
173
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 67
+0%
67
+0%
Dota 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 81
+0%
81
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+0%
62
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 22
+0%
22
+0%
Dota 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how FX 5500 and Arc A770M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770M is 8800% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770M is 5300% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 26.70
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 96 Watt 120 Watt

FX 5500 has 25% lower power consumption.

Arc A770M, on the other hand, has a 4844.4% higher aggregate performance score, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 5500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 5500 is a workstation card while Arc A770M is a notebook one.

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 Quadro FX 5500
Quadro FX 5500
Intel Arc A770M
Arc A770M

Other comparisons

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.


4 4 votes

Rate Quadro FX 5500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 93 votes

Rate Arc A770M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 5500 or Arc A770M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.