Arc Graphics 130V vs Quadro P1000
Arc Graphics 130V
Popular choices:
Quadro P1000
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. The Arc Graphics 130V is positioned at rank #302 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. 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 Graphics 130V
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc Graphics 130V is significantly newer (2024 vs 2017). The Arc Graphics 130V likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro P1000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc Graphics 130V is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro P1000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | Xe² (2024) (3nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro P1000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $80 versus $250 for the Arc Graphics 130V, it costs 68% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 211.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+211.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($250) | ✅More affordable ($80) |
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 Graphics 130V and Quadro P1000
Arc Graphics 130V
The Arc Graphics 130V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 24 2024. It features the Xe² architecture. The boost clock speed is 1850 MHz. It has 7 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 3 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,510 points.
Quadro P1000
The Quadro P1000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 7 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1493 MHz to 1519 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,495 points. Launch price was $375.
Graphics Performance
The Arc Graphics 130V scores 4,510 and the Quadro P1000 reaches 4,495 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc Graphics 130V is built on Xe² while the Quadro P1000 uses Pascal, both on 3 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 7 (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 640 (Quadro P1000). Boost clocks: 1850 MHz vs 1519 MHz.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,510 | 4,495 |
| Architecture | Xe² | Pascal |
| Process Node | 3 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 7 | 640+9043% |
| Boost Clock | 1850 MHz+22% | 1519 MHz |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Graphics 130V comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro P1000 has 4 GB. The Quadro P1000 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | Shared | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | System | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro P1000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 6th Gen NVENC (Pascal) (Quadro P1000). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs 3rd Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266 (Arc Graphics 130V) vs H.264,HEVC (Quadro P1000).
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Xe Media Engine | 6th Gen NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | Xe Media Engine | 3rd Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Arc Graphics 130V draws 15W versus the Quadro P1000's 40W — a 90.9% difference. The Arc Graphics 130V is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 350W (Quadro P1000). Power connectors: Integrated vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 145mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 15W-63% | 40W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Integrated | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 145mm |
| Height | 0mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 70°C-18% |
| Perf/Watt | 300.7+168% | 112.4 |
Value Analysis
The Arc Graphics 130V launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $250, while the Quadro P1000 launched at $0 and now averages $80. The Quadro P1000 costs 68% less ($170 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 18.0 (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 56.2 (Quadro P1000) — the Quadro P1000 offers 212.2% better value. The Arc Graphics 130V is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2017).
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130V | Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $250 | $80-68% |
| Performance per Dollar | 18.0 | 56.2+212% |
| Codename | Lunar Lake iGPU | GP107 |
| Release | September 24 2024 | February 7 2017 |
| Ranking | #463 | #466 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Arc Graphics 130V and Quadro P1000
