Intel Arc A380VSRadeon 740M 8300G
Performance, specifications and real-world gaming comparison
♜ WINNERIntel Arc A380+2%Better overall performance
Intel
Arc A380
VSWINNERArc A3802%Better overall performance
AMD
740M 8300G
Leistung3646
Price / Performance100100
Data confidence6969
Fixed-scale H2H model. Missing metrics are omitted instead of estimated from the overall score.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
IntelAMDPerformance
Price / performance
3646
100100
COMMUNITY · VERIFIZIERTE DATEN
Streamer-Setups öffnen→Hardware von Streamern
Echte öffentliche Setups, die mit jedem Gerät verknüpft sind.
IntelArc A3800Noch kein verifiziertes öffentliches Setup
AMD740M 8300G0Noch kein verifiziertes öffentliches Setup
VERGLEICHSERGEBNIS
Arc A380 is the best overall choice
Arc A380 leads in combined gaming performance. Arc A380 offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
Arc A380 leads in the combined performance index
Arc A380 costs less
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 1–5of 5
COMPARISON VERDICT
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Intel Arc A380
0 LikesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Intel Arc A380
100/100 · Price $139The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
GESAMTWERTUNG
Übersicht
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
36
46Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
32
40Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
30
37Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
52
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
60Better
59
VOLLSTÄNDIGER VERGLEICH
Spezifikationen
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
HDMI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0—
DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0—
USB Type-C——
DirectX12.2—
Vulkan1.4—
OpenGL4.6—
TFLOPS4.198Better2.87
TDP75 W—
Memory typeGDDR6SMA
Power connector6 pin—
Release date20222023
ArchitectureXe-HPG—
ThicknessDual-slot—
Max monitors——
Max resolution——
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0—
Launch price$139—
Shader units / Cores1024—
Clock speed300 - 2000 MHz800 - 2600 MHzBetter
Base clock300 MHz800 MHzBetter
Boost clock2000 MHz2600 MHzBetter
Video memory6 GB GDDR6- SMA
Memory clock15,5 GHz—
Memory bus96 bit—
Bandwidth186 GB/s—
InterfacePCIe 4x8IGP
Power consumption75 W—
Process node6 nm4 nmBetter
Recommended PSU250 W—
Length222 mm—
Die size157 mm²—
Memory cacheL2 4 MB—
Transistor count7200 million—
Gaming-FPS
Loading test-rig results…
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100364624%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100445319%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10043467%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100600200%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001000200%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from 3DMark, Geekbench, Cinebench, PassMark, Blender, or another third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10047462%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10046460%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10043467%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10049466%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10043467%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from 3DMark, Geekbench, Cinebench, PassMark, Blender, or another third-party benchmark.
API and SDK compatibility
DirectX12.2—
Vulkan1.4—
OpenGL4.6—
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0—
Basic information
ArchitectureXe-HPG—
Process node6 nm4 nmBesser
Release date20222023
Device class——
Detailed specifications
Transistor count7200 million—
Die size157 mm²—
Shader units / Cores1024—
Base clock300 MHz800 MHzBesser
Boost clock2000 MHz2600 MHzBesser
Form factor and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4x8IGP
Length222 mm—
ThicknessDual-slot—
Recommended PSU250 W—
Power connector6 pin—
Connectivity and outputs
HDMI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0—
DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0—
USB Type-C——
Max monitors——
Max resolution——
VRAM capacity and type
Video memory6 GB GDDR6- SMA
Memory typeGDDR6SMA
Memory bus96 bit—
TFLOPS4.198Besser2.87
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Weitere Vergleiche
GTX 1630NVIDIABewertungen und Fragen
KI-ERKLÄRUNG · HEAD TO HEAD
Diesen Vergleich erklären
Mehr als Prozentwerte: Ursachen, relevante Spezifikationen und praktische Auswirkungen hinter jedem Diagramm.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
ECHTE KONFIGURATIONEN
Erfahrungen von Besitzern
Echte Builds, Ergebnisse und Community-Feedback.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Häufige Fragen zum Vergleich
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Arc A380 or 740M 8300G?+
Arc A380 has the higher overall gaming score, while Arc A380 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Arc A380 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
Arc A380 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Arc A380 offers more overall performance, while Arc A380 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Arc A380 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
Arc A380 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Arc A380 leads in combined 1440p performance. Arc A380 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Arc A380 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Arc A380 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
Arc A380 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to Arc A380 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.