AMD
Radeon 780M 8700G vs Intel Arc 130T
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
Intel
Arc 130T
Aggregate performance score
We've compared 780M 8700G and Arc 130T across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Arc 130T outperforms 780M 8700G by ~26% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+26%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Partially verifiedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 16Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon 780M 8700G (~2%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider 780M 8700G
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · FSR
Reasons to consider Arc 130T
- Higher catalog performance index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · Intel XeSS
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
IntelPerformance
5063
Graphics card ranking
Positions 8–13of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon 780M 8700G
173 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
50
63Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
42
52Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
40
49Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
48Better
47
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
55Better
54
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
HDMI
DisplayPort
Power consumption——
TFLOPS
Clock speed
VRAM
Memory type
Memory frequency—
Upscaling
Compute API
Memory bandwidth—
Interface
Power consumption—
Release date
Launch price——
Base clock
Boost clockBetter
Process node
Max monitors
Length
Architecture
Transistor count
Die size
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Thickness
Shader units / cores
Memory cache
Memory bus
Power connector
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares 780M 8700G and Arc 130T across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
780M 8700GArc 130T
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
206 FPS
—
1080p Ultra
145 FPS
—
1440p Ultra
113 FPS
—
4K Ultra
56 FPS
—
Counter-Strike 2780M 8700G206 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G145 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G113 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G56 FPSArc 130T—
Cyberpunk 2077780M 8700G133 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G115 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G82 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G38 FPSArc 130T—
Forza Horizon 5780M 8700G168 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G109 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G102 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G82 FPSArc 130T—
Hogwarts Legacy780M 8700G109 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G91 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G73 FPSArc 130T—780M 8700G38 FPSArc 130T—
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100586511%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100000%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 100000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100506323%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.212.2
Vulkan1.3Not publicly specified
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingFSRIntel XeSS
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0OpenCL 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitectureNot publicly specifiedXe-LPG
Process node4 nmNot publicly specified
Release date2023Q1'25
Device classMobileMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor countNot publicly specifiedNot publicly specified
Die sizeNot publicly specifiedNot publicly specified
Shader units / coresNot publicly specified7 Xe cores
Base clock800 MHzNot publicly specified
Boost clock2900 MHzBetterUp to 2.2 GHz (depends on host processor)
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfaceIGPIntegrated into processor package
LengthOEM dependentNot applicable (integrated GPU)
ThicknessOEM dependentNot applicable (integrated GPU)
Recommended PSUOEM dependentSystem dependent
Power connectorIntegrated laptop powerNot applicable (integrated GPU)
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentHDMI 2.1 FRL (OEM dependent)
DisplayPortOEM dependentDisplayPort 2.1 UHBR20 (OEM dependent)
USB Type-COEM dependentOEM dependent
Max monitorsOEM dependent4 (platform capability)
Max resolutionOEM dependent7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (DisplayPort)
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM- SMAShared system memory; OEM configurable
Memory typeSMAShared DDR5 / LPDDR5X
Memory busSystem memory interfaceDepends on system memory configuration
TFLOPS8.91Not publicly specified
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 16
- Specifications
- 21 / 63
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (2)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (1)
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: 780M 8700G or Arc 130T?+
780M 8700G has the higher overall gaming score, while 780M 8700G offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
780M 8700G 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?+
780M 8700G is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
780M 8700G offers more overall performance, while 780M 8700G offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
780M 8700G is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
780M 8700G is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
780M 8700G leads in combined 1440p performance. 780M 8700G can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
780M 8700G is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
780M 8700G 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?+
780M 8700G 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 780M 8700G 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.