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

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega M GL
2018
4 GB HBM2, 65 Watt
10.09

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms RX Vega M GL by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking449441
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.69no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code namePolaris 22Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2018 (6 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 cores12804
Core clock speed931 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1011 MHz1950 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Wattno data
Texture fill rate80.88no data
Floating-point processing power2.588 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs80no 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).

InterfaceIGPno 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 typeHBM2no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width1024 Bitno data
Memory clock speed700 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12_2
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 HD24−27
−4.2%
25
+4.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Fortnite 55−60
−1.7%
60−65
+1.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
−2.6%
80−85
+2.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Dota 2 35−40
+140%
15
−140%
Fortnite 55−60
−3.4%
60−65
+3.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+140%
15
−140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
−2.6%
80−85
+2.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
−3.3%
30−35
+3.3%
World of Tanks 140−150
−2.8%
140−150
+2.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
−2.6%
80−85
+2.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
−1.7%
60−65
+1.7%

4K
High Preset

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

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Elden Ring 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Elden Ring 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 39
+0%
39
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Elden Ring 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
World of Tanks 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Elden Ring 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 10−11
+0%
10−11
+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 Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 140% faster.
  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 3% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GL is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is ahead in 7 tests (12%)
  • there's a draw in 48 tests (84%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.09 10.38
Recency 1 February 2018 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 2.9% 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).


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

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:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 10 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.