Radeon Pro 465 vs Arc A350M
Radeon Pro 465
Popular choices:
Arc A350M
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. The Radeon Pro 465 is positioned at rank 152 and the Arc A350M is on rank 86, so the Arc A350M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro 465
Performance Per Dollar Arc A350M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc A350M is significantly newer (2022 vs 2016). The Arc A350M 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. However, the Arc A350M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon Pro 465 | Arc A350M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) (6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon Pro 465 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 Radeon Pro 465 and Arc A350M
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.
Arc A350M
The Arc A350M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in March 30 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,500 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro 465 scores 4,538 and the Arc A350M reaches 4,500 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro 465 is built on GCN 4.0 while the Arc A350M uses Generation 12.7, both on 14 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Radeon Pro 465) vs 768 (Arc A350M). Raw compute: 1.858 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 465) vs 1.766 TFLOPS (Arc A350M). Boost clocks: 907 MHz vs 1150 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 465 | Arc A350M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,538 | 4,500 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Generation 12.7 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024+33% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.858 TFLOPS+5% | 1.766 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 907 MHz | 1150 MHz+27% |
| ROPs | 16 | 24+50% |
| TMUs | 64+33% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.1 MB+340% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro 465 | Arc A350M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | XeSS |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon Pro 465 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Arc A350M has 4 GB. The Arc A350M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon Pro 465) vs 4 MB (Arc A350M) — the Arc A350M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 465 | Arc A350M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro 465 draws 35W versus the Arc A350M's 25W — a 33.3% difference. The Arc A350M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro 465) vs 350W (Arc A350M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 465 | Arc A350M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 35W | 25W-29% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 129.7 | 180.0+39% |
Value Analysis
The Arc A350M is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2016).
| Feature | Radeon Pro 465 | Arc A350M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $500 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | — |
| Codename | Baffin | DG2-128 |
| Release | October 30 2016 | March 30 2022 |
| Ranking | #547 | #418 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon Pro 465 and Arc A350M
