Arc A770M vs Quadro M6000
Arc A770M
Popular choices:
Quadro M6000
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 A770M
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M6000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc A770M is significantly newer (2022 vs 2015). The Arc A770M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro M6000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc A770M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (16 GB vs 12 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro M6000.
| Insight | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🔮Strong Longevity (Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) / 6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (16 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Arc A770M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 A770M and Quadro M6000
Arc A770M
The Arc A770M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1650 MHz to 2050 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,853 points.
Quadro M6000
The Quadro M6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 21 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 988 MHz to 1114 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,769 points. Launch price was $4,199.99.
Graphics Performance
The Arc A770M scores 11,853 and the Quadro M6000 reaches 11,769 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc A770M is built on Generation 12.7 while the Quadro M6000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 6 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 4,096 (Arc A770M) vs 3,072 (Quadro M6000). Raw compute: 16.79 TFLOPS (Arc A770M) vs 6.844 TFLOPS (Quadro M6000). Boost clocks: 2050 MHz vs 1114 MHz.
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 11,853 | 11,769 |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 4096+33% | 3072 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 16.79 TFLOPS+145% | 6.844 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz+84% | 1114 MHz |
| ROPs | 128+33% | 96 |
| TMUs | 256+33% | 192 |
| L1 Cache | 6 MB+445% | 1.1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 16 MB+433% | 3 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 A770M comes with 16 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M6000 has 12 GB. The Arc A770M offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 512 GB/s (Arc A770M) vs 317 GB/s (Quadro M6000) — a 61.5% advantage for the Arc A770M. Bus width: 256-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 16 MB (Arc A770M) vs 3 MB (Quadro M6000) — the Arc A770M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 16 GB+33% | 12 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 512 GB/s+62% | 317 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 384-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 16 MB+433% | 3 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Arc A770M) vs 12/1 (Quadro M6000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12/1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc A770M) vs NVENC 4.0 (Quadro M6000). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (Arc A770M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M6000).
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Xe Media Engine | NVENC 4.0 |
| Decoder | Xe Media Engine | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Arc A770M draws 120W versus the Quadro M6000's 250W — a 70.3% difference. The Arc A770M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Arc A770M) vs 500W (Quadro M6000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 120W-52% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 267mm |
| Height | 0mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 98.8+110% | 47.1 |
Value Analysis
The Arc A770M is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2015).
| Feature | Arc A770M | Quadro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $4999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $500 |
| Codename | DG2-512 | GM200 |
| Release | 2022 | March 21 2015 |
| Ranking | #225 | #228 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Arc A770M and Quadro M6000
