Arc Graphics 130V vs Radeon Pro 465

Intel

Arc Graphics 130V

2024Boost: 1850 MHz
Similar parts
·······
VS
AMD

Radeon Pro 465

2016Core: 850 MHzBoost: 907 MHz
Similar parts
·······

Arc Graphics 130V vs Radeon Pro 465 Performance Spectrum

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.

Arc Graphics 130V vs Radeon Pro 465: 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 Graphics 130V

2024

Why buy it

  • Costs $200 less on MSRP ($300 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
  • Delivers 65.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 15.0 vs 9.1 G3D/$ ($300 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
  • Radeon Pro 465 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Arc Graphics 130V is the less risky modern option long term.
  • Draws 15W instead of 35W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
  • 2024 hardware with Unknown of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.

Radeon Pro 465

2016

Why buy it

  • 100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs Unknown).

Trade-offs

  • 2016 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
  • 66.7% HIGHER MSRP
    $500 MSRPvs$300 MSRP
  • Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 9.1 vs 15.0 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
  • 133.3% higher power demand at 35W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Radeon Pro 465 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 0.6% in PassMark G3D (4,538 vs 4,510), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Arc Graphics 130V is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 3nm process instead of 14nm and a newer 2024 generation instead of 2016. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
Arc Graphics 130V makes the most sense to buy today. It is $200 cheaper on MSRP at $300 vs $500, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 65.6% (15.0 vs 9.1), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Radeon Pro 465 still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Arc Graphics 130V vs Radeon Pro 465 Technical Specifications

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

Intel

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.

AMD

Radeon Pro 465

The Radeon Pro 465 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 30 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 850 MHz to 907 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,538 points.

Graphics Performance

The Arc Graphics 130V scores 4,510 and the Radeon Pro 465 reaches 4,538 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc Graphics 130V is built on Xe² while the Radeon Pro 465 uses GCN 4.0, both on 3 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 7 (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 1,024 (Radeon Pro 465). Boost clocks: 1850 MHz vs 907 MHz.

FeatureArc Graphics 130VRadeon Pro 465
G3D Mark Score
4,510
4,538
Architecture
Xe²
GCN 4.0
Process Node
3 nm
14 nm
Shading Units
7
1024+14529%
Boost Clock
1850 MHz+104%
907 MHz

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureArc Graphics 130VRadeon Pro 465
Upscaling Tech
Upscaling support
FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
AMD Anti-Lag
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Arc Graphics 130V has 0 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 465 carries 2 GB. Radeon Pro 465 gives you 100+% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is System on the Arc Graphics 130V and 64-bit on the Radeon Pro 465.

FeatureArc Graphics 130VRadeon Pro 465
VRAM Capacity
Shared
2 GB
Memory Type
Shared
GDDR5
Bus Width
System
64-bit
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Arc Graphics 130V draws 15W versus the Radeon Pro 465's 35W — a 80% difference. The Arc Graphics 130V is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 350W (Radeon Pro 465). Power connectors: Integrated vs PCIe-powered.

FeatureArc Graphics 130VRadeon Pro 465
TDP
15W-57%
35W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
Integrated
PCIe-powered
Length
0mm
Height
0mm
Slots
0
Temp (Load)
85°C
Perf/Watt
300.7+132%
129.7
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Arc Graphics 130V came in at $300, while the Radeon Pro 465 launched at $500. On MSRP, Arc Graphics 130V was 40% cheaper ($200 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 15.0 (Arc Graphics 130V) vs 9.1 (Radeon Pro 465) — the Arc Graphics 130V offers 64.8% better value. The newer card here is Arc Graphics 130V (2024 vs 2016).

FeatureArc Graphics 130VRadeon Pro 465
MSRP
$300-40%
$500
Performance per Dollar
15.0+65%
9.1
Codename
Lunar Lake iGPU
Baffin
Release
September 24 2024
October 30 2016
Ranking
#463
#547

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.