Radeon RX 6300 vs Arc A310
Radeon RX 6300
Popular choices:
Arc A310
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. The Radeon RX 6300 is positioned at rank #14 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent cost-benefit for your build. 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 Radeon RX 6300
Performance Per Dollar Arc A310
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc A310 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon RX 6300.
| Insight | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) (6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon RX 6300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $40 versus $100 for the Arc A310, it costs 60% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 144.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+144.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) |
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 RX 6300 and Arc A310
Radeon RX 6300
The Radeon RX 6300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,319 points.
Arc A310
The Arc A310 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in October 12 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2000 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,438 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon RX 6300 scores 5,319 and the Arc A310 reaches 5,438 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon RX 6300 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the Arc A310 uses Generation 12.7, both on a 6 nm process. Shader units: 768 (Radeon RX 6300) vs 768 (Arc A310). Raw compute: 3.686 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6300) vs 3.072 TFLOPS (Arc A310). Boost clocks: 2400 MHz vs 2000 MHz. Ray tracing: 12 RT cores (Radeon RX 6300) vs 6 (Arc A310) vs 96.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,319 | 5,438+2% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Generation 12.7 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.686 TFLOPS+20% | 3.072 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz+20% | 2000 MHz |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 48+50% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.1 MB+340% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 12+100% | 6 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6300 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. 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 A310 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 3 (Native) | XeSS |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Memory bandwidth: 64 GB/s (Radeon RX 6300) vs 124 GB/s (Arc A310) — a 93.8% advantage for the Arc A310. Bus width: 32-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon RX 6300) vs 4 MB (Arc A310) — the Arc A310 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 124 GB/s+94% |
| Bus Width | 32-bit | 64-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_2 (Radeon RX 6300) vs 12 Ultimate (Arc A310). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 Ultimate |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 3.0 (Radeon RX 6300) vs Xe Media Engine (Arc A310). Decoder: VCN 3.0 vs Xe Media Engine.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 3.0 | Xe Media Engine |
| Decoder | VCN 3.0 | Xe Media Engine |
| Codecs | — | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon RX 6300 draws 35W versus the Arc A310's 75W — a 72.7% difference. The Radeon RX 6300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (Radeon RX 6300) vs 300W (Arc A310). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 160mm vs 169mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 35W-53% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W | 300W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 160mm | 169mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 65°C |
| Perf/Watt | 152.0+110% | 72.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6300 launched at $60 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Arc A310 launched at $100 and now averages $100. The Radeon RX 6300 costs 60% less ($60 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 133.0 (Radeon RX 6300) vs 54.4 (Arc A310) — the Radeon RX 6300 offers 144.5% better value.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6300 | Arc A310 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $60-40% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-60% | $100 |
| Performance per Dollar | 133.0+144% | 54.4 |
| Codename | Navi 24 | DG2-128 |
| Release | January 4 2022 | October 12 2022 |
| Ranking | #379 | #422 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon RX 6300 and Arc A310
