Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design vs Arc A770M
Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
Arc A770M
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 Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Performance Per Dollar Arc A770M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.7% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Arc A770M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Turing (2018−2022) / 12nm) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) / 6nm) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (16 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design 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 Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design and Arc A770M
Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 780 MHz to 1380 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,173 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design scores 12,173 and the Arc A770M reaches 11,853 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Arc A770M uses Generation 12.7, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 4,096 (Arc A770M). Raw compute: 7.066 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 16.79 TFLOPS (Arc A770M). Boost clocks: 1380 MHz vs 2050 MHz. Ray tracing: 40 RT cores (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 32 (Arc A770M) with 320 Tensor cores vs 512.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 12,173+3% | 11,853 |
| Architecture | Turing | Generation 12.7 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560 | 4096+60% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.066 TFLOPS | 16.79 TFLOPS+138% |
| Boost Clock | 1380 MHz | 2050 MHz+49% |
| ROPs | 64 | 128+100% |
| TMUs | 160 | 256+60% |
| L1 Cache | 2.5 MB | 6 MB+140% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 16 MB+300% |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 40+25% | 32 |
| Tensor Cores | 320 | 512+60% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Arc A770M lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Arc A770M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | XeSS |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Arc A770M has 16 GB. The Arc A770M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 16 MB (Arc A770M) — the Arc A770M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 16 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 16 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 12.2 (Arc A770M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs Xe Media Engine (Arc A770M). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs Xe Media Engine. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (Arc A770M).
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | Xe Media Engine |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | Xe Media Engine |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design draws 80W versus the Arc A770M's 120W — a 40% difference. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 500W (Arc A770M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Arc A770M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 80W-33% | 120W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 152.2+54% | 98.8 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design and Arc A770M
