Intel
Intel Arc A350M vs Intel Arc 130V
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
Intel
Intel Arc 130V
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Intel Arc A350M and Intel Arc 130V across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Intel Arc 130V outperforms Intel Arc A350M by ~15% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+15%
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 A350M (~10%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Intel Arc A350M
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Reasons to consider Intel Arc 130V
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
IntelPerformance
Price / performance
3338
5565
Graphics card ranking
Positions 82–87of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Intel Arc 130V
170 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
33
38Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
30
34Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
28
31Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
33
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
44Better
40
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Release date
Upscaling
HDMI
DisplayPort
Max resolution
Max monitors
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPS
Power consumption—
Architecture
Memory type
Compute API
Launch price——
Shader units / cores
Interface
Thickness
Die size
Memory cache
Clock speed—
Base clock
Boost clock
VRAM
Memory frequency—
Memory bus
Memory bandwidth—
Power consumption—
Process node—
Transistor count
Device class
Power connector
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Intel Arc A350M and Intel Arc 130V 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.
Intel Arc A350MIntel Arc 130V
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
164 FPS
157 FPS
1080p Ultra
116 FPS
111 FPS
1440p Ultra
62 FPS
86 FPS
4K Ultra
22 FPS
43 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Intel Arc A350M164 FPSIntel Arc 130V157 FPSIntel Arc A350M116 FPSIntel Arc 130V111 FPSIntel Arc A350M62 FPSIntel Arc 130V86 FPSIntel Arc A350M22 FPSIntel Arc 130V43 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Intel Arc A350M106 FPSIntel Arc 130V102 FPSIntel Arc A350M91 FPSIntel Arc 130V88 FPSIntel Arc A350M45 FPSIntel Arc 130V62 FPSIntel Arc A350M15 FPSIntel Arc 130V29 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Intel Arc A350M134 FPSIntel Arc 130V128 FPSIntel Arc A350M87 FPSIntel Arc 130V83 FPSIntel Arc A350M56 FPSIntel Arc 130V77 FPSIntel Arc A350M33 FPSIntel Arc 130V63 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyIntel Arc A350M87 FPSIntel Arc 130V83 FPSIntel Arc A350M72 FPSIntel Arc 130V69 FPSIntel Arc A350M40 FPSIntel Arc 130V56 FPSIntel Arc A350M15 FPSIntel Arc 130V29 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100333814%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100433812%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10041388%
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 a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100453817%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100443815%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10041388%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100483823%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10041388%
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
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingXeSSXeSS
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0OpenCL 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitectureXe HPG (Alchemist)Xe2 LPG
Process node6 nm—
Release date20222024
Device classMobileMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count7200 millionNot publicly specified
Die size157 mm²Not publicly specified
Shader units / cores768Not publicly specified
Base clock1150 MHzOEM/TGP dependent
Boost clock2200 MHzOEM/TGP dependent
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8OEM platform dependent
LengthOEM dependentOEM dependent
ThicknessIGPOEM dependent
Recommended PSUOEM dependentOEM dependent
Power connectorIntegrated laptop powerIntegrated laptop power
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortOEM dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-COEM dependentOEM dependent
Max monitorsOEM dependentOEM dependent
Max resolutionDepends on host systemOEM dependent
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM4 GB GDDR6OEM configuration dependent
Memory typeGDDR6Shared LPDDR5X
Memory bus64 bitOEM configuration dependent
TFLOPS3.379OEM/TGP dependent
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
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 62
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 (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: Intel Arc A350M or Intel Arc 130V?+
Intel Arc A350M has the higher overall gaming score, while Intel Arc 130V offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Intel Arc A350M 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?+
Intel Arc A350M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Intel Arc A350M offers more overall performance, while Intel Arc A350M offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Intel Arc A350M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
Intel Arc 130V is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Intel Arc A350M leads in combined 1440p performance. Intel Arc A350M can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Intel Arc A350M is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Intel Arc A350M 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?+
Intel Arc A350M 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 Intel Arc A350M 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.