Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

Place in the ranking	452	450
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	10.71	no data
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2018 (7 years ago)	14 December 2023 (1 year 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 cores	1280	4
Core clock speed	931 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1011 MHz	1950 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	80.88	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.588 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	80	no 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).

Interface

IGP

no 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 type	HBM2	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12_2
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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 HD

24−27

−4.2%

25
+4.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Fortnite	55−60 +3.6%	55−60 −3.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	140−150 +2.9%	140−150 −2.9%
Dota 2	65−70 +6.2%	65−70 −6.2%
Fortnite	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +140%	15 −140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2	65−70 +6.2%	65−70 −6.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

55−60
+3.6%

55−60

−3.6%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

9−10

+0%

9−10
+0%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	11 +0%	11 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50 +0%	50 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	16 +0%	16 +0%
Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	13 +0%	13 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Far Cry 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	39 +0%	39 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Atomic Heart	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Fortnite	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +0%	30 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Atomic Heart

12−14

+0%

12−14

+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Atomic Heart	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Fortnite	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

This is how RX Vega M GL and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 4% faster in 1080p

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

in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 140% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega M GL is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 57 tests (98%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.15	10.26
Recency	1 February 2018	14 December 2023
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 1.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX Vega M GL and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc).

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.

Radeon RX Vega M GL

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Radeon RX Vega M GL

Iris Xe Graphics G7

Graphics 4 Cores iGPU (Arc)

GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q

Radeon RX Vega M GL

GeForce GTX 880M

NVIDIA GeForce GTS 240 OEM

GeForce 9800M GT

GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 4 GB

GTX 1660 Ti

NVIDIA Quadro P520 Max-Q

GTX 1660 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce 7300 LE

HD Graphics 4400

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 X2

HD 5450

GeForce RTX 3050 Max-Q Refresh 4 GB

GTX 1070 Max-Q

NVIDIA GeForce 6800

HD Graphics 5300

NVIDIA GeForce 8200M G mGPU Intel

RX 550

AMD Radeon R1E Mobile Graphics

UHD Graphics

AMD FirePro R5000

UHD Graphics 600

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.2 22 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M GL on a scale of 1 to 5:

2.1 10 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) on a scale of 1 to 5:

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega M GL or Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.