Intel
Intel Arc A770 vs GeForce 205
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
205
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc A770 and 205 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Arc A770 outperforms 205 by 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.+31%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better.Intel Arc A770 vs GeForce 205: key takeaway
The comparison of Arc A770 and 205 shows a 31% advantage for Arc A770 in gaming performance, while 205 may still be stronger in efficiency and feature set. Use the sections below to check whether that lead comes from real FPS, specifications, efficiency, price or platform features.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
Intel
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
5542
81100
100100
8813
COMPARISON RESULT
Arc A770 is the best overall choice
Arc A770 leads in combined game performance. Arc A770 offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
Arc A770 leads in the combined performance index
205 costs less
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 33–38of 317
COMPARISON VERDICT
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Intel Arc A770
118 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce 205
100/100 · Price $79The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
OVERALL SCORE
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
The Summary score section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
55Better
42
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
46Better
37
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
44Better
34
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
81
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
69Better
64
FULL COMPARISON
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
The Specifications section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DisplayPortDisplayPort 2.0—
HDMIHDMI 2.1—
Device classDesktopDesktop
DirectX12.210.0
Vulkan1.4—
OpenGL4.6OpenGL 3.3
TFLOPS19.66Better0.045
Power consumption225 W31 WBetter
Memory typeGDDR6DDR2
Power connector8+8 pinNone
Memory cacheL2 16 MBNot publicly specified
UpscalingXeSS—
Clock speed2100 - 2400 MHzBetter589 MHz
Base clock2100 MHzBetter589 MHz
Boost clock2400 MHzBetter589 MHz
VRAM16 GB GDDR6512 MB DDR2Better
Memory frequency16 GHz800 MHzBetter
Memory bus256 bitBetter64 bit
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s6400 GB/sBetter
InterfacePCIe 4x16PCIe 2x16
Release date20222009
ArchitectureXe-HPGTesla
ThicknessDual-slotIGP
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0—
Launch price$329$79Better
Shader units / cores4096Better16
Power consumption225 W31 WBetter
Process node6 nmBetter40 nm
Recommended PSU550 WVaries by board
Die size406 mm²144 mm²Better
Transistor count21700 millionBetter314 million
Max monitors4Varies by board
Max resolution7680 × 4320Varies by board
LengthVaries by boardVaries by board
USB Type-CNoNo
GAME TEST BENCH
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Arc A770 and 205 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 A770205
Verified H2HCommunity VerifiedEstimatedPredicted
Black Myth: Wukong
1080p High
27 FPSEstimated 66%
24 FPSEstimated 64%
1080p Ultra
23 FPSEstimated 66%
21 FPSEstimated 64%
1440p Ultra
17 FPSEstimated 66%
12 FPSEstimated 60%
4K Ultra
10 FPSEstimated 66%
5 FPSEstimated 56%
Black Myth: WukongArc A77027 FPSEstimated 66%20524 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77023 FPSEstimated 66%20521 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77017 FPSEstimated 66%20512 FPSEstimated 60%Arc A77010 FPSEstimated 66%2055 FPSEstimated 56%
Call of Duty: WarzoneArc A77027 FPSEstimated 66%20524 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77023 FPSEstimated 66%20521 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77017 FPSEstimated 66%20512 FPSEstimated 60%Arc A77010 FPSEstimated 66%2055 FPSEstimated 56%
Counter-Strike 2Arc A770228 FPSEstimated 74%205204 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A770160 FPSEstimated 74%205143 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A770125 FPSEstimated 74%20588 FPSEstimated 68%Arc A77062 FPSEstimated 74%20534 FPSEstimated 64%
Cyberpunk 2077Arc A770147 FPSEstimated 74%205132 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A770127 FPSEstimated 74%205113 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A77090 FPSEstimated 74%20564 FPSEstimated 68%Arc A77042 FPSEstimated 74%20523 FPSEstimated 64%
Forza Horizon 5Arc A770186 FPSEstimated 80%205166 FPSEstimated 78%Arc A770120 FPSEstimated 74%205108 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A770112 FPSEstimated 74%20579 FPSEstimated 68%Arc A77091 FPSEstimated 74%20549 FPSEstimated 64%
God of War RagnarökArc A77027 FPSEstimated 66%20524 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77023 FPSEstimated 66%20521 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77017 FPSEstimated 66%20512 FPSEstimated 60%Arc A77010 FPSEstimated 66%2055 FPSEstimated 56%
Hogwarts LegacyArc A770120 FPSEstimated 74%205108 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A770101 FPSEstimated 74%20590 FPSEstimated 72%Arc A77081 FPSEstimated 74%20557 FPSEstimated 68%Arc A77042 FPSEstimated 74%20523 FPSEstimated 64%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024Arc A77027 FPSEstimated 66%20524 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77023 FPSEstimated 66%20521 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77017 FPSEstimated 66%20512 FPSEstimated 60%Arc A77010 FPSEstimated 66%2055 FPSEstimated 56%
Monster Hunter WildsArc A77027 FPSEstimated 66%20524 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77023 FPSEstimated 66%20521 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77017 FPSEstimated 66%20512 FPSEstimated 60%Arc A77010 FPSEstimated 66%2055 FPSEstimated 56%
StarfieldArc A77027 FPSEstimated 66%20524 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77023 FPSEstimated 66%20521 FPSEstimated 64%Arc A77017 FPSEstimated 66%20512 FPSEstimated 60%Arc A77010 FPSEstimated 66%2055 FPSEstimated 56%
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
The Benchmarks section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100554227%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100643461%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100643461%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1008813149%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1008110021%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
The Detailed comparison section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100702983%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100683078%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100643461%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100732695%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100653365%
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
The Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DirectX12.210.0
Vulkan1.4—
OpenGL4.6OpenGL 3.3
UpscalingXeSS—
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0—
Architecture and release
The Architecture and release section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
ArchitectureXe-HPGTesla
Process node6 nmBetter40 nm
Release date20222009
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
The Core layout and clocks section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
Transistor count21700 millionBetter314 million
Die size406 mm²144 mm²Better
Shader units / cores4096Better16
Base clock2100 MHzBetter589 MHz
Boost clock2400 MHzBetter589 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
The Form factor and compatibility section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
InterfacePCIe 4x16PCIe 2x16
LengthVaries by boardVaries by board
ThicknessDual-slotIGP
Recommended PSU550 WVaries by board
Power connector8+8 pinNone
Display outputs and limits
The Display outputs section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
HDMIHDMI 2.1—
DisplayPortDisplayPort 2.0—
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors4Varies by board
Max resolution7680 × 4320Varies by board
Memory and compute throughput
The VRAM capacity and bandwidth section compares Arc A770 and 205 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
VRAM16 GB GDDR6512 MB DDR2Better
Memory typeGDDR6DDR2
Memory bus256 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS19.66Better0.045
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Other comparisons
Navi II 2CU 7xxx/9xxxAMDReviews and questions
AI EXPLAIN · HEAD TO HEAD
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.
REAL CONFIGURATIONS
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Arc A770 or 205?+
Arc A770 has the higher overall gaming score, while Arc A770 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
205 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?+
205 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 A770 offers more overall performance, while Arc A770 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
205 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 A770 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Arc A770 leads in combined 1440p performance. Arc A770 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Arc A770 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
205 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?+
205 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 A770 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.