Arc A310 vs Radeon RX 6300
Arc A310
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 6300
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 Radeon RX 6300
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc A310 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon RX 6300.
| Insight | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) |
| Longevity | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) (6nm) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon RX 6300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $40 versus $100 for the Arc A310, it costs 60% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 144.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+144.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
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 Radeon RX 6300
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.
Radeon RX 6300
The Radeon RX 6300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,319 points.
Graphics Performance
The Arc A310 scores 5,438 and the Radeon RX 6300 reaches 5,319 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc A310 is built on Generation 12.7 while the Radeon RX 6300 uses RDNA 2.0, both on a 6 nm process. Shader units: 768 (Arc A310) vs 768 (Radeon RX 6300). Raw compute: 3.072 TFLOPS (Arc A310) vs 3.686 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6300). Boost clocks: 2000 MHz vs 2400 MHz. Ray tracing: 6 RT cores (Arc A310) vs 12 (Radeon RX 6300) with 96 Tensor cores.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,438+2% | 5,319 |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.072 TFLOPS | 3.686 TFLOPS+20% |
| Boost Clock | 2000 MHz | 2400 MHz+20% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 48+50% |
| L1 Cache | 1.1 MB+340% | 0.25 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 6 | 12+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6300 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Arc A310 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | XeSS | FSR 3 (Native) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Memory bandwidth: 124 GB/s (Arc A310) vs 64 GB/s (Radeon RX 6300) — a 93.8% advantage for the Arc A310. Bus width: 64-bit vs 32-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Arc A310) vs 1 MB (Radeon RX 6300) — the Arc A310 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 124 GB/s+94% | 64 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 64-bit+100% | 32-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Arc A310) vs 12_2 (Radeon RX 6300). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12_2 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc A310) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon RX 6300). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs VCN 3.0.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Xe Media Engine | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | Xe Media Engine | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The Arc A310 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 6300's 35W — a 72.7% difference. The Radeon RX 6300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (Arc A310) vs 300W (Radeon RX 6300). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 169mm vs 160mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 35W-53% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W | 300W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 169mm | 160mm |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 72.5 | 152.0+110% |
Value Analysis
The Arc A310 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the Radeon RX 6300 launched at $60 and now averages $40. The Radeon RX 6300 costs 60% less ($60 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 54.4 (Arc A310) vs 133.0 (Radeon RX 6300) — the Radeon RX 6300 offers 144.5% better value.
| Feature | Arc A310 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | $60-40% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $100 | $40-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.4 | 133.0+144% |
| Codename | DG2-128 | Navi 24 |
| Release | October 12 2022 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #422 | #379 |
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 Radeon RX 6300
