Arc A310 vs GeForce GTX 950
Arc A310
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 950
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Arc A310
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc A310 is significantly newer (2022 vs 2015). The Arc A310 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 950 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc A310 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.5% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 950.
| Insight | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.5%) |
| Longevity | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) (6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 950 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $48 versus $100 for the Arc A310, it costs 52% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 105.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+105.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) | ✅More affordable ($48) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Arc A310 and GeForce GTX 950
Arc A310
The Arc A310 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in October 12 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2000 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,438 points.
GeForce GTX 950
The GeForce GTX 950 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 20 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1024 MHz to 1188 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 90W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,357 points. Launch price was $159.
Graphics Performance
The Arc A310 scores 5,438 and the GeForce GTX 950 reaches 5,357 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc A310 is built on Generation 12.7 while the GeForce GTX 950 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 6 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 768 (Arc A310) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 950). Raw compute: 3.072 TFLOPS (Arc A310) vs 1.825 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 950). Boost clocks: 2000 MHz vs 1188 MHz.
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,438+2% | 5,357 |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.072 TFLOPS+68% | 1.825 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz+68% | 1188 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 48+50% |
| L1 Cache | 1.1 MB+293% | 0.28 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | XeSS | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Arc A310 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 950 has 2 GB. The Arc A310 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 124 GB/s (Arc A310) vs 106 GB/s (GeForce GTX 950) — a 17% advantage for the Arc A310. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Arc A310) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 950) — the Arc A310 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 124 GB/s+17% | 106 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Arc A310) vs 12_1 (GeForce GTX 950). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12_1 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc A310) vs NVENC 2nd Gen (GeForce GTX 950). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs NVDEC 2nd Gen. Supported codecs: AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 (Arc A310) vs H.264,H.265 (GeForce GTX 950).
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Xe Media Engine | NVENC 2nd Gen |
| Decoder | Xe Media Engine | NVDEC 2nd Gen |
| Codecs | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 | H.264,H.265 |
Power & Dimensions
The Arc A310 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 950's 90W — a 18.2% difference. The Arc A310 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (Arc A310) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 950). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 169mm vs 202mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-17% | 90W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 169mm | 202mm |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 72.5+22% | 59.5 |
Value Analysis
The Arc A310 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the GeForce GTX 950 launched at $159 and now averages $48. The GeForce GTX 950 costs 52% less ($52 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 54.4 (Arc A310) vs 111.6 (GeForce GTX 950) — the GeForce GTX 950 offers 105.1% better value. The Arc A310 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2015).
| Feature | Arc A310 | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-37% | $159 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $100 | $48-52% |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.4 | 111.6+105% |
| Codename | DG2-128 | GM206 |
| Release | October 12 2022 | August 20 2015 |
| Ranking | #422 | #425 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Arc A310 and GeForce GTX 950
