Arc A370M vs FirePro S9000

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.

Arc A370M vs FirePro S9000 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Arc A370M vs FirePro S9000: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Arc A370M

2022

Why buy it

✅Better long-term bet: Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) on 6nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
✅Draws 35W instead of 225W, a 190W reduction.
✅More future proof: Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 2.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).

FirePro S9000

2012

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 2.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌2012 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌542.9% higher power demand at 225W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Arc A370M is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 1.1% in PassMark G3D (5,115 vs 5,059), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Arc A370M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 6nm process instead of 28nm, 8 vs 0 ray-tracing units, and a newer 2022 generation instead of 2012. That gives it the more rounded hardware package for newer games.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

FirePro S9000 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, FirePro S9000 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Arc A370M has the stronger long-term case.

Arc A370M vs FirePro S9000 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Arc A370M

The Arc A370M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in March 30 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1550 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 8 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,115 points.

FirePro S9000

The FirePro S9000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 24 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 900 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,059 points. Launch price was $2,499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Arc A370M scores 5,115 and the FirePro S9000 reaches 5,059 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc A370M is built on Generation 12.7 while the FirePro S9000 uses GCN 1.0, both on 6 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Arc A370M) vs 1,792 (FirePro S9000). Raw compute: 3.174 TFLOPS (Arc A370M) vs 3.226 TFLOPS (FirePro S9000).

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
G3D Mark Score	5,115+1%	5,059
Architecture	Generation 12.7	GCN 1.0
Process Node	6 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1792+75%
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.174 TFLOPS	3.226 TFLOPS+2%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	112+75%
L1 Cache	1.5 MB+241%	0.44 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB+433%	0.75 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 4 GB of GDDR6. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Arc A370M and 128-bit on the FirePro S9000. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Arc A370M) vs 0.75 MB (FirePro S9000) — the Arc A370M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	4 MB+433%	0.75 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Arc A370M) vs 12 (FirePro S9000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
DirectX	12 Ultimate	12
Vulkan	1.3+8%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	6+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc A370M) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro S9000). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs UVD 3.2. Supported codecs: AV1,H.265,H.264,VP9 (Arc A370M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (FirePro S9000).

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
Encoder	Xe Media Engine	VCE 1.0
Decoder	Xe Media Engine	UVD 3.2
Codecs	AV1,H.265,H.264,VP9	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Arc A370M draws 35W versus the FirePro S9000's 225W — a 146.2% difference. The Arc A370M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc A370M) vs 350W (FirePro S9000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 90 vs 90°C.

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
TDP	35W-84%	225W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	0mm	267mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	90	90°C
Perf/Watt	146.1+549%	22.5

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Arc A370M (2022 vs 2012).

Feature	Arc A370M	FirePro S9000
MSRP	—	$2499
Codename	DG2-128	Tahiti
Release	March 30 2022	August 24 2012
Ranking	#439	#441

Search Arc A370M on Amazon

Search FirePro S9000 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.