Arc A380 vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 with Arc A380, including specs and performance data.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
2020
10.03

Arc A380 outperforms Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 by an impressive 61% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking451332
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data43.99
Power efficiencyno data14.94
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeDG2-128
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 August 2020 (4 years ago)14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

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 cores961024
Core clock speedno data2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistorsno data7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data131.2
Floating-point processing powerno data4.198 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data222 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data6 GB
Memory bus widthno data96 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1937 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data186.0 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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX 12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3

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.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 10.03
Arc A380 16.11
+60.6%

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.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 5000
Arc A380 10174
+103%

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 HD27−30
−74.1%
47
+74.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.17

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−154%
61
+154%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−213%
95−100
+213%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−205%
60−65
+205%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−191%
65−70
+191%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−171%
75−80
+171%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−148%
160−170
+148%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−144%
130−140
+144%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−178%
75−80
+178%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−222%
100−110
+222%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−200%
72
+200%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−213%
95−100
+213%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−205%
60−65
+205%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−191%
65−70
+191%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−171%
75−80
+171%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−148%
160−170
+148%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−144%
130−140
+144%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−226%
100−110
+226%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
−178%
75−80
+178%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−150%
80
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−142%
60−65
+142%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−20.8%
29
+20.8%
Battlefield 5 30−35
−45.2%
45−50
+45.2%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−191%
65−70
+191%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+15.8%
57
−15.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−30.8%
34
+30.8%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
−50%
30−33
+50%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−50%
24−27
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−210%
30−35
+210%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−57.9%
30−33
+57.9%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−209%
30−35
+209%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−60%
24−27
+60%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−289%
170−180
+289%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−255%
140−150
+255%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−55.6%
14−16
+55.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−386%
30−35
+386%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−217%
18−20
+217%
Battlefield 5 9−10
−55.6%
14−16
+55.6%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−240%
16−18
+240%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−242%
40−45
+242%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50
+0%
50
+0%
Hitman 3 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 37
+0%
37
+0%
Hitman 3 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 31
+0%
31
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 52
+0%
52
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 61
+0%
61
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 25
+0%
25
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A380 is 74% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is 16% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A380 is 386% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • Arc A380 is ahead in 32 tests (48%)
  • there's a draw in 33 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.03 16.11
Recency 15 August 2020 14 June 2022
Chip lithography 10 nm 6 nm

Arc A380 has a 60.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is a notebook card while Arc A380 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.


Intel Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 15 votes

Rate Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 820 votes

Rate Arc A380 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.