Intel Arc A370M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
Comparative analysis of Intel Arc A370M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Arc A370M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 7 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 48% higher core clock speed: 1550 MHz vs 1050 MHz
- Around 74% higher boost clock speed: 2050 MHz vs 1178 MHz
- 1203.7x more texture fill rate: 131.2 GTexel/s vs 109 billion / sec
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 6 nm vs 28 nm
- 4.2x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 148 Watt
- 250x more memory clock speed: 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective vs 7.0 GB/s
- Around 59% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 167.171 vs 105.107
- Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1470.844 vs 1225.96
- Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.937 vs 8.76
- 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 71.258 vs 35.714
- Around 4% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 29612 vs 28428
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 Mar 2022 vs 19 September 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1550 MHz vs 1050 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2050 MHz vs 1178 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 131.2 GTexel/s vs 109 billion / sec |
| Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 148 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective vs 7.0 GB/s |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 167.171 vs 105.107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1470.844 vs 1225.96 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.937 vs 8.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 71.258 vs 35.714 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 29612 vs 28428 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
- Around 63% higher pipelines: 1664 vs 1024
- Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 489.884 vs 482.549
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 770 vs 724
- Around 88% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 9639 vs 5115
- Around 5% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3625 vs 3443
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 1664 vs 1024 |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 489.884 vs 482.549 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 770 vs 724 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9639 vs 5115 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3625 vs 3443 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel Arc A370M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
| Name | Intel Arc A370M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 167.171 | 105.107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1470.844 | 1225.96 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.937 | 8.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 71.258 | 35.714 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 482.549 | 489.884 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 724 | 770 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5115 | 9639 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 29612 | 28428 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3443 | 3625 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11499 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11499 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel Arc A370M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | DG2-128 | GM204 |
| Launch date | 30 Mar 2022 | 19 September 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 361 | 364 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $329 | |
| Price now | $407.76 | |
| Type | Desktop | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 28.59 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 2050 MHz | 1178 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1550 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 1,050 GFLOPS (1:4) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 4.198 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 1664 |
| Pixel fill rate | 65.60 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 131.2 GTexel/s | 109 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 148 Watt |
| Transistor count | 7200 million | 5,200 million |
| CUDA cores | 1664 | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,920 gflops | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDCP | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Form factor | IGP | |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
| SLI options | 4x | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pins | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 224 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective | 7.0 GB/s |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel Arc A370M with others
IntelArc A370M vs
AMDRadeon HD 7730
IntelArc A370M vs
AMDRadeon R9 290
IntelArc A370M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970
IntelArc A370M vs
NVIDIATesla M6
IntelArc A370M vs
NVIDIATesla P4
IntelArc A370M vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5300M
