Arc A550M vs Titan X Pascal

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.77
+37.4%

Titan X Pascal outperforms Arc A550M by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking155223
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.90no data
Power efficiency9.4228.56
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGP102DG2-512
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

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 cores35842048
Core clock speed1417 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1531 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate342.9262.4
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
TMUs224128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount12 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/s224.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA+-

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.

Titan X Pascal 33.77
+37.4%
Arc A550M 24.57

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.

Titan X Pascal 27349
+90.6%
Arc A550M 14350

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 HD127
+41.1%
90−95
−41.1%
1440p71
+42%
50−55
−42%
4K57
+42.5%
40−45
−42.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.44no data
1440p16.89no data
4K21.04no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 79
+103%
35−40
−103%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 104
+100%
50−55
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 95
+132%
40−45
−132%
Battlefield 5 174
+123%
75−80
−123%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 108
+120%
45−50
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+100%
35−40
−100%
Far Cry 5 121
+120%
55−60
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 138
+119%
60−65
−119%
Forza Horizon 4 240
+70.2%
140−150
−70.2%
Hitman 3 104
+117%
45−50
−117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 296
+167%
110−120
−167%
Metro Exodus 143
+74.4%
80−85
−74.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 125
+102%
60−65
−102%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 161
+101%
80−85
−101%
Watch Dogs: Legion 226
+124%
100−110
−124%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 121
+133%
50−55
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
+107%
40−45
−107%
Battlefield 5 165
+112%
75−80
−112%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 98
+100%
45−50
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+76.9%
35−40
−76.9%
Far Cry 5 92
+67.3%
55−60
−67.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 108
+71.4%
60−65
−71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 225
+59.6%
140−150
−59.6%
Hitman 3 104
+117%
45−50
−117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 275
+148%
110−120
−148%
Metro Exodus 143
+74.4%
80−85
−74.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 102
+64.5%
60−65
−64.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 194
+143%
80−85
−143%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
+84.6%
50−55
−84.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 216
+114%
100−110
−114%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 67
+28.8%
50−55
−28.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 63
+53.7%
40−45
−53.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75
+53.1%
45−50
−53.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+51.3%
35−40
−51.3%
Far Cry 5 67
+21.8%
55−60
−21.8%
Forza Horizon 4 112
−25.9%
140−150
+25.9%
Hitman 3 93
+93.8%
45−50
−93.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150
+35.1%
110−120
−35.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167
+109%
80−85
−109%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
+82.7%
50−55
−82.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 64
−57.8%
100−110
+57.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 118
+90.3%
60−65
−90.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+41.7%
35−40
−41.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+44%
24−27
−44%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+122%
21−24
−122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 58
+115%
27−30
−115%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+153%
14−16
−153%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+39.3%
27−30
−39.3%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+41.9%
130−140
−41.9%
Hitman 3 66
+136%
27−30
−136%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
+141%
45−50
−141%
Metro Exodus 101
+124%
45−50
−124%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 122
+139%
50−55
−139%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+58.6%
27−30
−58.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 212
+55.9%
130−140
−55.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 92
+130%
40−45
−130%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 63
+174%
21−24
−174%
Far Cry New Dawn 48
+167%
18−20
−167%
Hitman 3 39
+105%
18−20
−105%
Horizon Zero Dawn 129
+4.9%
120−130
−4.9%
Metro Exodus 67
+148%
27−30
−148%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+162%
24−27
−162%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+171%
14−16
−171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+146%
12−14
−146%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
+162%
12−14
−162%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+200%
6−7
−200%
Far Cry 5 33
+154%
12−14
−154%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+121%
30−35
−121%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70
+141%
27−30
−141%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
+136%
10−12
−136%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 47
+124%
21−24
−124%

This is how Titan X Pascal and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is 41% faster in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal is 42% faster in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal is 43% faster in 4K

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Titan X Pascal is 200% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A550M is 58% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • Arc A550M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.77 24.57
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 60 Watt

Titan X Pascal has a 37.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 166.7% more advanced lithography process, and 316.7% lower power consumption.

The Titan X Pascal is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A550M in performance tests.

Be aware that Titan X Pascal is a desktop card while Arc A550M is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M

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.


2.6 2995 votes

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 75 votes

Rate Arc A550M 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.