Arc Graphics 140T
VS
Radeon Pro 465

Arc Graphics 140T vs Radeon Pro 465

Intel

Arc Graphics 140T

2025Boost: 2350 MHz
VS
AMD

Radeon Pro 465

2016Core: 850 MHzBoost: 907 MHz

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. The Arc Graphics 140T is positioned at rank 330 and the Radeon Pro 465 is on rank 152, so the Radeon Pro 465 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Arc Graphics 140T

#320
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
844%
#322
765%
#323
763%
#327
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
694%
#328
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
689%
#330
Arc Graphics 140T
MSRP: $350|Avg: $300
100%
#331
Radeon 680M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $80
99%
#333
GeForce 730A
MSRP: $60|Avg: $20
99%
#334
GeForce GT 745A
MSRP: $99|Avg: $20
97%
#335
GeForce 710A
MSRP: $35|Avg: $62
96%
#336
95%
#338
GeForce MX230
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
95%
#340
RADEON HD6410D
MSRP: $35|Avg: $5
94%
#341
GeForce 820M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30
94%
#342
Radeon R7 M465X
MSRP: $150|Avg: $45
93%
#344
GeForce 830A
MSRP: $100|Avg: $30
91%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro 465

#70
Radeon PRO W6800
MSRP: $2249|Avg: $2249
99%
#72
Quadro P4200
MSRP: $1200|Avg: $110
95%
#74
RTX 5000 Ada Generation
MSRP: $4000|Avg: $4095
83%
#137
Tesla K20m
MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55
1627%
#152
Radeon Pro 465
MSRP: $500|Avg: $150
100%
#154
Tesla P4
MSRP: $1000|Avg: $190
99%
#155
Radeon Pro WX 4150
MSRP: $300|Avg: $120
97%
#158
Quadro M2200
MSRP: $500|Avg: $70
95%
#159
Quadro M4000
MSRP: $791|Avg: $350
93%
#160
FirePro W4100
MSRP: $183|Avg: $183
90%
#166
FirePro W5100
MSRP: $399|Avg: $50
82%
#167
Radeon Pro WX 4170
MSRP: $400|Avg: $120
79%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Arc Graphics 140T is significantly newer (2025 vs 2016). The Arc Graphics 140T likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon Pro 465 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon Pro 465 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (2 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Arc Graphics 140T.

InsightArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%)
Leading raw performance (+0.8%)
Longevity
Xe+ (2025) (Standard Node)
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+100+%)
Efficiency
Normal Efficiency
Normal Efficiency
Case Fit

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon Pro 465 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $150 versus $300 for the Arc Graphics 140T, it costs 50% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 101.7% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+101.7%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)
More affordable ($150)

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 140T and Radeon Pro 465

Intel

Arc Graphics 140T

The Arc Graphics 140T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the Xe+ architecture. The boost clock speed is 2350 MHz. It has 8 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,500 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 140T scores 4,500 and the Radeon Pro 465 reaches 4,538 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc Graphics 140T is built on Xe+ while the Radeon Pro 465 uses GCN 4.0. Shader units: 8 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 1,024 (Radeon Pro 465). Boost clocks: 2350 MHz vs 907 MHz.

FeatureArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
G3D Mark Score
4,500
4,538
Architecture
Xe+
GCN 4.0
Shading Units
8
1024+12700%
Boost Clock
2350 MHz+159%
907 MHz
L2 Cache
8 MB+700%
1 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
Upscaling Tech
XeSS
FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation
FSR 3 (Compatible)
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
AMD Anti-Lag
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Arc Graphics 140T comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 465 has 2 GB. The Radeon Pro 465 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 8 MB (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 1 MB (Radeon Pro 465) — the Arc Graphics 140T has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
VRAM Capacity
Shared
2 GB
Memory Type
Shared
GDDR5
Bus Width
System
64-bit
L2 Cache
8 MB+700%
1 MB
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Arc Graphics 140T draws 35W versus the Radeon Pro 465's 35W — a 0% difference. The Radeon Pro 465 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 350W (Radeon Pro 465). Power connectors: Integrated vs PCIe-powered.

FeatureArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
TDP
35W
35W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
Integrated
PCIe-powered
Length
0mm
Height
0mm
Slots
0
Temp (Load)
85°C
Perf/Watt
128.6
129.7
💰

Value Analysis

The Arc Graphics 140T launched at $350 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the Radeon Pro 465 launched at $500 and now averages $150. The Radeon Pro 465 costs 50% less ($150 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.0 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 30.3 (Radeon Pro 465) — the Radeon Pro 465 offers 102% better value. The Arc Graphics 140T is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2016).

FeatureArc Graphics 140TRadeon Pro 465
MSRP
$350-30%
$500
Avg Price (30d)
$300
$150-50%
Performance per Dollar
15.0
30.3+102%
Codename
Baffin
Release
January 6 2025
October 30 2016
Ranking
#409
#547