Arc A310 vs Quadro P400

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P400 with Arc A310, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P400
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
4.29

Arc A310 outperforms P400 by a whopping 232% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking680367
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.49no data
Power efficiency9.8413.06
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGP107DG2-128
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 February 2017 (7 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores256768
Core clock speed1228 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed1252 MHz2000 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate20.0364.00
Floating-point processing power0.641 TFLOPS3.072 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs1632
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1002 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth32.06 GB/s124.0 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 Connectors3x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

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 P400 4.29
Arc A310 14.23
+232%

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.

Quadro P400 1648
Arc A310 5472
+232%

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 HD10−12
−280%
38
+280%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 32
+0%
32
+0%
Elden Ring 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80
+0%
80
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Elden Ring 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65
+0%
65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 28
+0%
28
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
World of Tanks 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 54
+0%
54
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Elden Ring 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how Quadro P400 and Arc A310 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A310 is 280% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.29 14.23
Recency 7 February 2017 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro P400 has 150% lower power consumption.

Arc A310, on the other hand, has a 231.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P400 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A310 is a desktop 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 P400
Quadro P400
Intel Arc A310
Arc A310

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.


4.1 493 votes

Rate Quadro P400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 260 votes

Rate Arc A310 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.