Intel
Intel Arc A730M vs GeForce GTX 950
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTX 950
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Intel Arc A730M and GTX 950 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Intel Arc A730M outperforms GTX 950 by ~50% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+50%
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 A730M (~8%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Intel Arc A730M
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · XeSS
Reasons to consider GTX 950
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.2 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
Intel
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
4832
100100
60100
8056
Graphics card ranking
Positions 4–9of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 950
168 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
48Better
32
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
41Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
39Better
27
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
56Better
52
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Length
Release date
Upscaling
HDMI
DisplayPort
Max resolution
Max monitors
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Architecture
Memory type
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Interface
Thickness
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Transistor countBetter
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 A730M and GTX 950 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 A730MGTX 950
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
207 FPS
162 FPS
1080p Ultra
145 FPS
112 FPS
1440p Ultra
113 FPS
62 FPS
4K Ultra
46 FPS
22 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Intel Arc A730M207 FPSGTX 950162 FPSIntel Arc A730M145 FPSGTX 950112 FPSIntel Arc A730M113 FPSGTX 95062 FPSIntel Arc A730M46 FPSGTX 95022 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Intel Arc A730M134 FPSGTX 950105 FPSIntel Arc A730M115 FPSGTX 95089 FPSIntel Arc A730M82 FPSGTX 95045 FPSIntel Arc A730M31 FPSGTX 95015 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Intel Arc A730M168 FPSGTX 950132 FPSIntel Arc A730M109 FPSGTX 95084 FPSIntel Arc A730M102 FPSGTX 95056 FPSIntel Arc A730M68 FPSGTX 95032 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyIntel Arc A730M109 FPSGTX 95085 FPSIntel Arc A730M91 FPSGTX 95070 FPSIntel Arc A730M73 FPSGTX 95040 FPSIntel Arc A730M31 FPSGTX 95015 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100483240%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100563741%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100573938%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100805635%
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 / 100624336%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100614139%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100573938%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100654536%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100583939%
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
DirectX12.212.1
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingXeSSNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.2
Architecture and release
ArchitectureXe HPG (Alchemist)Maxwell 2.0
Process node6 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20222015
Device classMobileDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count21700 millionBetter2940 million
Die size406 mm²228 mm²Better
Shader units / cores3072Better768
Base clock1100 MHzBetter1024 MHz
Boost clock2050 MHzBetter1188 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 3x16
LengthOEM dependent202 mm
ThicknessIGPDual-slot
Recommended PSUOEM dependent250 W
Power connectorIntegrated laptop power6 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentHDMI 2.0
DisplayPortOEM dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-COEM dependentNo
Max monitorsOEM dependent5
Max resolutionDepends on host system7680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM12 GB GDDR6Better2 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5
Memory bus192 bitBetter128 bit
TFLOPS12.6Better1.825
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 / 69
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 (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · 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 A730M or GTX 950?+
Intel Arc A730M has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 950 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 950 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?+
GTX 950 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 A730M offers more overall performance, while Intel Arc A730M offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 950 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 950 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Intel Arc A730M leads in combined 1440p performance. Intel Arc A730M can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Intel Arc A730M 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 A730M 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 A730M 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 A730M 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.