Intel
Intel Arc A380 vs FirePro W4300
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
FirePro W4300
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc A380 and FirePro W4300 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Arc A380 outperforms FirePro W4300 by ~6% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+6%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Intel Arc A380 (~6%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Arc A380
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Reasons to consider FirePro W4300
- Lower stated power consumption
- Lower recorded market price
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
Intel
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3632
100100
100100
6056
Graphics card ranking
Positions 106–111of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Intel Arc A380
92 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
FirePro W4300
Price $65.00Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
36Better
32
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
32Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
30Better
27
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
55Better
52
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
HDMI
Device class
Upscaling
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSU
LengthBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Arc A380 and FirePro W4300 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.
Arc A380FirePro W4300
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
188 FPS
162 FPS
1080p Ultra
129 FPS
112 FPS
1440p Ultra
69 FPS
62 FPS
4K Ultra
23 FPS
22 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Arc A380188 FPSFirePro W4300162 FPSArc A380129 FPSFirePro W4300112 FPSArc A38069 FPSFirePro W430062 FPSArc A38023 FPSFirePro W430022 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Arc A380121 FPSFirePro W4300104 FPSArc A380102 FPSFirePro W430088 FPSArc A38050 FPSFirePro W430045 FPSArc A38015 FPSFirePro W430014 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Arc A380153 FPSFirePro W4300132 FPSArc A38097 FPSFirePro W430084 FPSArc A38062 FPSFirePro W430055 FPSArc A38034 FPSFirePro W430032 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyArc A38099 FPSFirePro W430085 FPSArc A38081 FPSFirePro W430070 FPSArc A38045 FPSFirePro W430040 FPSArc A38016 FPSFirePro W430015 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100363212%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100443523%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100433910%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10060567%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
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 / 10047439%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100464111%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100433910%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10049459%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100433910%
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
DirectX12.212.0
Vulkan1.41.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingXeSSNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureXe-HPGGCN 2.0
Process node6 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20222015
Device classDesktopProf
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count7200 millionBetter2080 million
Die size157 mm²Better160 mm²
Shader units / cores1024Better768
Base clock300 MHz930 MHzBetter
Boost clock2000 MHzBetter930 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4x8PCIe 3x16
Length222 mm171 mmBetter
ThicknessDual-slotSingle-slot
Recommended PSU250 W250 W
Power connector6 pinNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.1Board dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 2.0mini-DisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors44
Max resolution7680 × 43204096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM6 GB GDDR6Better4 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5
Memory bus96 bit128 bitBetter
TFLOPS4.198Better1.429
Other comparisons
GTX 1650 GDDR6NVIDIAReviews 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
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
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 (6)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · 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: Arc A380 or FirePro W4300?+
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?+
FirePro W4300 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?+
FirePro W4300 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.