Arc A370M vs Radeon 680M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 680M and Arc A370M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon 680M
2023
50 Watt
8.67

Arc A370M outperforms 680M by an impressive 54% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking500386
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.9226.14
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRembrandt+DG2-128
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 January 2023 (2 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 cores7681024
Core clock speed2000 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHz1550 MHz
Number of transistors13,100 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate105.699.20
Floating-point processing power3.379 TFLOPS3.174 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs4864
Ray Tracing Cores128

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 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
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 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.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3

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.

Radeon 680M 8.67
Arc A370M 13.31
+53.5%

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.

Radeon 680M 3334
Arc A370M 5115
+53.4%

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.

Radeon 680M 10371
Arc A370M 12090
+16.6%

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.

Radeon 680M 6865
Arc A370M 8149
+18.7%

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.

Radeon 680M 43225
+21.4%
Arc A370M 35604

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Radeon 680M 2303
Arc A370M 3885
+68.7%

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 HD37
−2.7%
38
+2.7%
1440p19
−10.5%
21
+10.5%
4K10
−300%
40
+300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 28
+21.7%
21−24
−21.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
−17.9%
46
+17.9%
Elden Ring 34
−2.9%
35
+2.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−53.6%
40−45
+53.6%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+13%
21−24
−13%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
−35.7%
19
+35.7%
Forza Horizon 4 56
−32.1%
74
+32.1%
Metro Exodus 39
+5.4%
35−40
−5.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−37.5%
30−35
+37.5%
Valorant 161
+204%
50−55
−204%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−53.6%
40−45
+53.6%
Counter-Strike 2 21
−9.5%
21−24
+9.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−18.2%
13
+18.2%
Dota 2 48
+14.3%
42
−14.3%
Elden Ring 66
+65%
40−45
−65%
Far Cry 5 36
+50%
24
−50%
Fortnite 50−55
−47.1%
75−80
+47.1%
Forza Horizon 4 47
−31.9%
62
+31.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+24.1%
29
−24.1%
Metro Exodus 27
+108%
13
−108%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
−44.1%
95−100
+44.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−37.5%
30−35
+37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−53.8%
40−45
+53.8%
Valorant 30
−76.7%
50−55
+76.7%
World of Tanks 120−130
−38%
170−180
+38%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−53.6%
40−45
+53.6%
Counter-Strike 2 18
−27.8%
21−24
+27.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−22.2%
11
+22.2%
Dota 2 61
−8.2%
66
+8.2%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−37.8%
50−55
+37.8%
Forza Horizon 4 40
−32.5%
53
+32.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
−44.1%
95−100
+44.1%
Valorant 146
+175%
50−55
−175%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 17
+54.5%
11
−54.5%
Elden Ring 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+54.5%
11
−54.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−138%
100−105
+138%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
World of Tanks 60−65
−51.6%
90−95
+51.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−68.8%
27−30
+68.8%
Counter-Strike 2 10
−220%
30−35
+220%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−100%
10−11
+100%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−72.2%
30−35
+72.2%
Forza Horizon 4 27
−37%
37
+37%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−86.7%
27−30
+86.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Valorant 21−24
−50%
30−35
+50%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Dota 2 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Elden Ring 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−56%
35−40
+56%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 2
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 18
−122%
40
+122%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−70%
16−18
+70%
Fortnite 9−10
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 14
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Valorant 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%

This is how Radeon 680M and Arc A370M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A370M is 3% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A370M is 11% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A370M is 300% faster in 4K

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

  • in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 680M is 204% faster.
  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A370M is 220% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is ahead in 12 tests (19%)
  • Arc A370M is ahead in 51 test (81%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.67 13.31
Recency 3 January 2023 30 March 2022
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 35 Watt

Radeon 680M has an age advantage of 9 months.

Arc A370M, on the other hand, has a 53.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 42.9% lower power consumption.

The Arc A370M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 680M in performance tests.


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.


AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M
Intel Arc A370M
Arc A370M

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.


4.2 985 votes

Rate Radeon 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 166 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.