CPU
GPU
Arc A770
Popular choices:
Titan X Pascal
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 A770
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc A770 is significantly newer (2022 vs 2016). The Arc A770 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Titan X Pascal lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Titan X Pascal is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Arc A770 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.5%) |
| Longevity | 🔮Strong Longevity (Alchemist / 6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (16 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (280mm) | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Titan X Pascal offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $200 versus $280 for the Arc A770, it costs 29% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 43.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+43.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($280) | ✅More affordable ($200) |
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 A770 and Titan X Pascal
Arc A770
The Arc A770 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in October 12 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2100 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,332 points. Launch price was $329.
Titan X Pascal
The Titan X Pascal is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 2 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1417 MHz to 1531 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,660 points. Launch price was $1,199.
Graphics Performance
The Arc A770 scores 13,332 and the Titan X Pascal reaches 13,660 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc A770 is built on Generation 12.7 while the Titan X Pascal uses Pascal, both on 6 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 4,096 (Arc A770) vs 3,584 (Titan X Pascal). Raw compute: 19.66 TFLOPS (Arc A770) vs 10.97 TFLOPS (Titan X Pascal). Boost clocks: 2400 MHz vs 1531 MHz.
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 13,332 | 13,660+2% |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 4096+14% | 3584 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 19.66 TFLOPS+79% | 10.97 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz+57% | 1531 MHz |
| ROPs | 128+33% | 96 |
| TMUs | 256+14% | 224 |
| L2 Cache | 16 MB+433% | 3 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | XeSS | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Arc A770 comes with 16 GB of VRAM, while the Titan X Pascal has 8 GB. The Arc A770 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 512 GB/s (Arc A770) vs 480 GB/s (Titan X Pascal) — a 6.7% advantage for the Arc A770. Bus width: 256-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 16 MB (Arc A770) vs 3 MB (Titan X Pascal) — the Arc A770 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |
| Memory Bandwidth | 512 GB/s+7% | 480 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 384-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 16 MB+433% | 3 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Arc A770) vs 12.1 (Titan X Pascal). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Dual Xe Media Engine (Arc A770) vs NVENC 5.0 (2x) (Titan X Pascal). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs PureVideo HD VP8. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,AV1,VP9 (Arc A770) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Titan X Pascal).
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Dual Xe Media Engine | NVENC 5.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | Xe Media Engine | PureVideo HD VP8 |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,AV1,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Arc A770 draws 225W versus the Titan X Pascal's 250W — a 10.5% difference. The Arc A770 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (Arc A770) vs 600W (Titan X Pascal). Power connectors: 8-pin + 6-pin vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 280mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W-10% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 600W-8% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin + 6-pin | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | 280mm | 267mm |
| Height | — | 112mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-12% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 59.3+9% | 54.6 |
Value Analysis
The Arc A770 launched at $349 MSRP and currently averages $280, while the Titan X Pascal launched at $1199 and now averages $200. The Titan X Pascal costs 28.6% less ($80 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 47.6 (Arc A770) vs 68.3 (Titan X Pascal) — the Titan X Pascal offers 43.5% better value. The Arc A770 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2016).
| Feature | Arc A770 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $349-71% | $1199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $280 | $200-29% |
| Performance per Dollar | 47.6 | 68.3+43% |
| Codename | DG2-512 | GP102 |
| Release | October 12 2022 | August 2 2016 |
| Ranking | #191 | #198 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Arc A770 and Titan X Pascal
