Arc Graphics 140V vs Radeon 760M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 760M and Arc Graphics 140V, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon 760M
2023
15 Watt
14.83
+10.3%

760M outperforms Arc Graphics 140V by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking358385
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency68.06no data
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)Xe² (2025)
GPU code nameHawx PointLunar Lake iGPU
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 December 2023 (1 year ago)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 cores5128
Core clock speed800 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2599 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors25,390 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology4 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate83.17no data
Floating-point processing power5.323 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data
Ray Tracing Cores8no data

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 x8no data
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 SharedLPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
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 data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12_2
Shader Model6.8no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.3-

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 760M 14.83
+10.3%
Arc Graphics 140V 13.44

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 760M 5700
+10.4%
Arc Graphics 140V 5165

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 760M 9603
Arc Graphics 140V 10688
+11.3%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Radeon 760M 32985
Arc Graphics 140V 39055
+18.4%

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 760M 6142
Arc Graphics 140V 9492
+54.6%

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 760M 41767
Arc Graphics 140V 53014
+26.9%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Radeon 760M 2116
Arc Graphics 140V 4038
+90.9%

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 HD31
−29%
40
+29%
1440p19
−5.3%
20
+5.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 25
−80%
45
+80%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+9.1%
40−45
−9.1%
Counter-Strike 2 19
−94.7%
37
+94.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+20%
10−11
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 51
−52.9%
78
+52.9%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+10.8%
35−40
−10.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Valorant 60−65
+11.1%
50−55
−11.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+9.1%
40−45
−9.1%
Counter-Strike 2 18
−66.7%
30
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Dota 2 23
−91.3%
44
+91.3%
Far Cry 5 29
−20.7%
35
+20.7%
Fortnite 80−85
+9.2%
75−80
−9.2%
Forza Horizon 4 44
−47.7%
65
+47.7%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
−26.5%
43
+26.5%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+10.8%
35−40
−10.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+8.1%
95−100
−8.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+9.8%
40−45
−9.8%
Valorant 60−65
+11.1%
50−55
−11.1%
World of Tanks 190−200
+7.3%
170−180
−7.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+9.1%
40−45
−9.1%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+4%
25
−4%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+20.8%
24−27
−20.8%
Dota 2 50−55
+17.8%
45−50
−17.8%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+7.8%
50−55
−7.8%
Forza Horizon 4 37
−54.1%
57
+54.1%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+8.1%
95−100
−8.1%
Valorant 60−65
+11.1%
50−55
−11.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 21−24
+22.2%
18
−22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+10%
20−22
−10%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+19.1%
110−120
−19.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
World of Tanks 100−110
+9.5%
95−100
−9.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−7.7%
14
+7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+16.1%
30−35
−16.1%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+15.6%
30−35
−15.6%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+10.3%
27−30
−10.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Valorant 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Dota 2 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+12.8%
35−40
−12.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Dota 2 24−27
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
Fortnite 16−18
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+10.5%
18−20
−10.5%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Valorant 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%

This is how Radeon 760M and Arc Graphics 140V compete in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 140V is 29% faster in 1080p
  • Arc Graphics 140V is 5% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Dota 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 760M is 22% faster.
  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc Graphics 140V is 95% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is ahead in 44 tests (80%)
  • Arc Graphics 140V is ahead in 10 tests (18%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.83 13.44
Chip lithography 4 nm 3 nm

Radeon 760M has a 10.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc Graphics 140V, on the other hand, has a 33.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc Graphics 140V 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 760M
Radeon 760M
Intel Arc Graphics 140V
Arc Graphics 140V

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.


4.2 218 votes

Rate Radeon 760M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 10 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140V 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.