Arc A550M vs Quadro P3200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P3200 with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P3200
2018
6 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
22.79

Arc A550M outperforms P3200 by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking245223
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.1828.47
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGP104DG2-512
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date21 February 2018 (6 years ago)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 cores17922048
Core clock speed1328 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1543 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate172.8262.4
Floating-point processing power5.53 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs112128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 amount6 GB8 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth168.3 GB/s224.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable 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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA6.1-

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.

Quadro P3200 22.79
Arc A550M 24.51
+7.5%

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.

Quadro P3200 12555
Arc A550M 14350
+14.3%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Quadro P3200 4356
Arc A550M 5830
+33.8%

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 HD84
−7.1%
90−95
+7.1%
4K28
−7.1%
30−35
+7.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−5.4%
35−40
+5.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65
+25%
50−55
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
−5.1%
40−45
+5.1%
Battlefield 5 75−80
−4%
75−80
+4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−5.4%
35−40
+5.4%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−3.8%
55−60
+3.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−5%
60−65
+5%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−2.9%
140−150
+2.9%
Hitman 3 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−3.7%
110−120
+3.7%
Metro Exodus 75−80
−3.8%
80−85
+3.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−3.3%
60−65
+3.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 129
+61.3%
80−85
−61.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
−2%
100−110
+2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 88
+69.2%
50−55
−69.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
−5.1%
40−45
+5.1%
Battlefield 5 75−80
−4%
75−80
+4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−5.4%
35−40
+5.4%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−3.8%
55−60
+3.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−5%
60−65
+5%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−2.9%
140−150
+2.9%
Hitman 3 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−3.7%
110−120
+3.7%
Metro Exodus 75−80
−3.8%
80−85
+3.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−3.3%
60−65
+3.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
−3.9%
80−85
+3.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−4%
50−55
+4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
−2%
100−110
+2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40
−30%
50−55
+30%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
−5.1%
40−45
+5.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−5.4%
35−40
+5.4%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−3.8%
55−60
+3.8%
Forza Horizon 4 72
−95.8%
140−150
+95.8%
Hitman 3 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−3.7%
110−120
+3.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
−3.9%
80−85
+3.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
−13%
50−55
+13%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
−2%
100−110
+2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−3.3%
60−65
+3.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−2.3%
45−50
+2.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−4.5%
21−24
+4.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−7.7%
27−30
+7.7%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−4.6%
130−140
+4.6%
Hitman 3 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−4.3%
45−50
+4.3%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−4.7%
45−50
+4.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−4.1%
50−55
+4.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−7.4%
27−30
+7.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
−3%
130−140
+3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−5.3%
40−45
+5.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
−4.2%
120−130
+4.2%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−8%
27−30
+8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+7.7%
24−27
−7.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−7.4%
27−30
+7.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%

This is how Quadro P3200 and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A550M is 7% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A550M is 7% faster in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P3200 is 69% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A550M is 96% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P3200 is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
  • Arc A550M is ahead in 63 tests (88%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.79 24.51
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 60 Watt

Arc A550M has a 7.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 166.7% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro P3200 and Arc A550M.

Be aware that Quadro P3200 is a mobile workstation card while Arc A550M is a mobile workstation 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 Quadro P3200
Quadro P3200
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M

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.


3.7 294 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 74 votes

Rate Arc A550M 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.