Arc Graphics 140T vs Radeon R9 Nano

Arc Graphics 140T

2025Boost: 2350 MHz

Radeon R9 Nano

2015Boost: 1000 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Arc Graphics 140T

4,500

0.0%

4,609

+2.4%

Radeon HD 6850 X2

Radeon R9 260

Radeon RX 550 (móvel)

Radeon RX 460 (móvel)

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 140T is positioned at rank #330 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

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

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

765%

#323

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

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

Radeon HD 8670D + HD 6670 Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

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

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 2015). 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 R9 Nano lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 Nano is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% 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.

Insight	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%)
Longevity	Xe+ (2025) (Standard Node)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))
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 Radeon R9 Nano offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $200 versus $300 for the Arc Graphics 140T, it costs 33% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 53.6% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+53.6%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)	✅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.

Arc Graphics 140T Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 Nano Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Arc Graphics 140T and Radeon R9 Nano

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.

Radeon R9 Nano

The Radeon R9 Nano is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 27 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 175W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,609 points. Launch price was $649.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Arc Graphics 140T scores 4,500 and the Radeon R9 Nano reaches 4,609 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc Graphics 140T is built on Xe+ while the Radeon R9 Nano uses GCN 3.0. Shader units: 8 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 4,096 (Radeon R9 Nano). Boost clocks: 2350 MHz vs 1000 MHz.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
G3D Mark Score	4,500	4,609+2%
Architecture	Xe+	GCN 3.0
Shading Units	8	4096+51100%
Boost Clock	2350 MHz+135%	1000 MHz
L2 Cache	8 MB+300%	2 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
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 R9 Nano has 2 GB. The Radeon R9 Nano offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 4096-bit. L2 Cache: 8 MB (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 2 MB (Radeon R9 Nano) — the Arc Graphics 140T has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
VRAM Capacity	Shared	2 GB
Memory Type	Shared	HBM
Memory Bandwidth	System	512 GB/s
Bus Width	System	4096-bit
L2 Cache	8 MB+300%	2 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.2 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 12 (Radeon R9 Nano). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
DirectX	12.2+2%	12
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc Graphics 140T) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 Nano). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs UVD 6.0.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
Encoder	Xe Media Engine	VCE 3.0
Decoder	Xe Media Engine	UVD 6.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Arc Graphics 140T draws 35W versus the Radeon R9 Nano's 175W — a 133.3% difference. The Arc Graphics 140T is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 550W (Radeon R9 Nano). Power connectors: Integrated vs 1x 8-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 152mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	Radeon R9 Nano
TDP	35W-80%	175W
Recommended PSU	350W-36%	550W
Power Connector	Integrated	1x 8-pin
Length	0mm	152mm
Height	0mm	—
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	85°C	—
Perf/Watt	128.6+389%	26.3

💰

Value Analysis

The Arc Graphics 140T launched at $350 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the Radeon R9 Nano launched at $649 and now averages $200. The Radeon R9 Nano costs 33.3% less ($100 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.0 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 23.0 (Radeon R9 Nano) — the Radeon R9 Nano offers 53.3% better value. The Arc Graphics 140T is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2015).