AMD Radeon HD 7950 vs Intel Arc A730M Comparison

Intel Arc A730M and AMD Radeon HD 7950 occupy very different positions in the database, separated by over a decade of architecture and process technology. The Arc A730M records an average benchmark score of 45,592, placing it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 7950 averages 33,951, sitting in the 78th percentile. This 34% gap in aggregate performance is the headline, but the two cards also tell a story about feature support and memory capacity that matters for specific workloads. The Arc A730M is the clear winner in almost every measurable category, but the HD 7950 retains relevance only in legacy scenarios and as a historical data point.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A730M dominates in raw compute and modern API support. Its FP32 throughput of 12.60 TFLOPS is 4.4 times the HD 7950's 2.867 TFLOPS, and its FP16 capability at 25.19 TFLOPS (2:1) is something the older card cannot match at all. The Arc also wins decisively in texture and pixel throughput: 393.6 GTexel/s versus 89.60 GTexel/s, and 196.8 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s. For any workload that stresses shader math, texture filtering, or rasterization, the Arc A730M is the only viable option.

The AMD Radeon HD 7950 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. It does, however, hold one architectural advantage: a 384-bit memory bus compared to the Arc's 192-bit bus, though this does not translate to a bandwidth win, as the Arc A730M still outputs 336.0 GB/s versus 240.0 GB/s. The HD 7950 also has a lower TDP, but that is not a performance win. In terms of raw scores, the Arc A730M wins every recorded benchmark, and the HD 7950's lone score from Geekbench Metal is its only data point.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc A730M than the AMD Radeon HD 7950 in overall benchmark score?

A: The Arc A730M averages 45,592, which is 34.3% higher than the HD 7950's 33,951. The database also places the Arc in the 84th percentile versus the HD 7950's 78th.

Q: Can the Radeon HD 7950 run modern Vulkan games?

A: It supports Vulkan 1.2.170, but the Arc A730M supports Vulkan 1.4, and the Arc also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) while the HD 7950 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1). The Arc is the only one of the two with hardware ray tracing cores.

Q: Is the Radeon HD 7950 a better choice for power-sensitive owners?

A: No. The HD 7950 has a 200 W TDP and requires a 550 W power supply plus two 6-pin connectors. The Arc A730M has an 80 W TDP and is listed as an integrated graphics package (IGP) with portable-device-dependent outputs.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Arc A730M has 336.0 GB/s over a 192-bit GDDR6 interface, while the HD 7950 has 240.0 GB/s over a 384-bit GDDR5 bus. The Arc has both a higher bandwidth and a larger 12 GB frame buffer versus 3 GB.

Q: What is the transistor density comparison between the two?

A: The Arc A730M is built on TSMC's 6 nm node with 53.4 million transistors per mm², totaling 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. The HD 7950 uses TSMC's 28 nm node with 12.3 million per mm², totaling 4,313 million on a 352 mm² die.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The HD 7950 was released on 2012-01-30, while the Arc A730M has no recorded release date.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database has no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two cards, but the individual recorded tests tell a clear story. The Arc A730M's strongest single result is in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 70,352. Its Vulkan score is 64,693, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1,732. The HD 7950's only recorded benchmark is Geekbench Metal at 33,951.

That Metal score falls far below the Arc's OpenCL and Vulkan scores, and it is also the HD 7950's only data point, making its 33,951 average identical to its single test. The Arc A730M's 45,592 average is driven by a mix of DirectX 12 and compute workloads, and it places the card 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT (45,384) and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (45,152). The HD 7950's 33,951 average sits 0.1% below the Radeon RX 480 (33,997) and 0.3% above the RX 7700S (33,849).

The performance gap is not close. The Arc A730M's FP32 rate alone is more than four times the HD 7950's, and its pixel and texture rates are 7.7x and 4.4x higher, respectively. Even the memory bandwidth advantage, 336.0 GB/s versus 240.0 GB/s, favors the newer card despite the HD 7950's wider bus.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every physical and electrical specification. The Arc A730M has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, versus the HD 7950's 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Arc also has 24 ray tracing cores, a feature the HD 7950 lacks entirely.

Memory capacity and interface are major separators: the Arc has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, while the HD 7950 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The Arc's memory clock is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the HD 7950 runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps). The Arc has PCIe 4.0 x16 connectivity; the HD 7950 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Power and physical design are also different. The Arc A730M is an 80 W integrated graphics package (IGP) with no dedicated power connectors, while the HD 7950 is a 200 W dual-slot card requiring two 6-pin power connectors and a 550 W suggested PSU. The HD 7950 measures 278 mm long, 111 mm high, and 38 mm wide, while the Arc has no recorded dimensions. Display outputs on the Arc are portable device dependent, whereas the HD 7950 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras of design. The Arc A730M uses the Intel Xe-HPG architecture, the DG2-512 chip, and is built on TSMC's 6 nm process. It packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, for a density of 53.4 million per mm². The HD 7950 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, the Tahiti chip, and TSMC's 28 nm process. It has 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, with a density of 12.3 million per mm².

The Arc A730M is part of Intel's Alchemist generation for Arc 7 Mobile, while the HD 7950 is from AMD's Southern Islands generation (HD 7900). The HD 7950 has a known predecessor (Northern Islands) and successor (Sea Islands), while the Arc has none recorded. The API support reflects the age gap: the Arc supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 7950 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Arc also has no recorded FP16 capability, but its FP32 output is far above the HD 7950's.

The Arc A730M's ray tracing cores are a generational feature absent from the HD 7950, and the newer card's 6 nm process is nearly five times as dense as the 28 nm process. This explains how the Arc delivers 4.4x the FP32 performance at 40% of the power draw, a direct result of architectural and process improvements.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Arc A730M is the faster, more capable GPU across every recorded metric. It offers higher compute throughput (12.60 TFLOPS versus 2.867 TFLOPS), more memory (12 GB versus 3 GB), higher bandwidth (336.0 GB/s versus 240.0 GB/s), and modern API support with ray tracing. Its 80 W power draw versus the 200 W TDP of the HD 7950 makes it more efficient as well, and its 84th percentile standing compared to the HD 7950's 78th confirms its higher overall performance class.

The AMD Radeon HD 7950 should only be considered by someone with legacy hardware requirements. It has no recorded wins, no API advantage, and its only benchmark score in the database is a Metal result that falls 34.3% below the Arc A730M's average. The HD 7950 offers a wider 384-bit bus, but that does not compensate for a 30% bandwidth deficit. It is an end-of-life product with a 2012 launch, and the database shows no scenario where it outpaces the Arc A730M.

Pick the Arc A730M for any modern workload, from gaming to compute. Pick the HD 7950 only if a specific legacy application requires its exact hardware profile, and even then, the data shows no performance advantage. The Arc A730M is the decisive winner in this comparison.