Intel Arc A770M vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive margin in the two common benchmark tests available for both GPUs. The Intel Arc A770M dominates the NVIDIA T400 in every measured category, with the largest gap appearing in compute-oriented workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel part scores 89,494 points against the NVIDIA T400's 17,039 points. That is a delta of 425.2%, meaning the Arc A770M delivers more than five times the raw compute throughput of the T400 in this test. The margin is slightly narrower in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Arc A770M posts 74,422 points versus 15,976 points for the T400, a 365.8% advantage. Both deltas are massive, and the data leaves no room for ambiguity about which GPU is faster in absolute terms.

The average benchmark score reinforces the same story. The Arc A770M holds an average of 18,383 across its full benchmark suite, while the T400 averages 16,508. That difference is modest compared to the head-to-head results, but it still favors the Intel part by roughly 11%. However, the average score is heavily influenced by the T400's limited benchmark coverage, which only includes the two Geekbench tests. The Arc A770M has a much broader set of recorded results, including PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, plus PassMark G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. When those additional tests are factored in, the Arc A770M's advantage becomes more pronounced, but the database's average score calculation still places both GPUs within a similar percentile band.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each GPU, the data reveals interesting context. The Arc A770M sits at the 62nd percentile among all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 460, which scores 18,373, just 0.1% behind. Other close competitors include the AMD FirePro D500 (18,533, 0.8% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18,189, 1.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18,159, 1.2% behind). This means the Arc A770M is not an outlier in its performance class; it sits right in the middle of a cluster of mid-range desktop and mobile GPUs. The T400, by contrast, holds the 60th percentile, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 at 16,504, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16,415, 0.6% behind) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16,408, 0.6% behind) are also extremely close. The T400's average score is essentially identical to several much newer and higher-tier workstation cards, which suggests its benchmark profile is dominated by the two Geekbench results and may not reflect its true gaming or graphics capabilities.

In the direct head-to-head tests, the Arc A770M wins both, and the database records 2 wins for Intel and 0 for NVIDIA. The margin in OpenCL is particularly striking: 425.2% is not a small edge, it is a category-level difference. The Vulkan gap is similarly large. This is not a case of one GPU being slightly faster; the Arc A770M is in a different performance tier entirely. The T400's closest rival comparison shows it is competitive with high-end workstation GPUs in average score, but that is an artifact of sparse benchmark data. When both GPUs run the same test, the Intel part crushes the NVIDIA part.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Arc A770M is the faster GPU by every measurable metric. If the choice is purely about raw performance, the Arc A770M wins outright. The 425.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and the 365.8% lead in Geekbench Vulkan are not incremental gains; they represent a completely different performance class. The T400 has no recorded wins in any shared benchmark. Its only statistically significant advantage is its power draw, which the database lists at 30 W versus the Arc A770M's 120 W, but that is a specification difference, not a benchmark result. The T400 also has a lower percentile ranking (60th versus 62nd), so even in aggregate positioning, it trails the Intel part.

That said, the verdict depends on context. The T400 is a single-slot, low-power card with no external power connectors and a suggested PSU of 200 W. It is designed for compact workstations or embedded systems where space and power are constrained. The Arc A770M is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with a 120 W TDP, which means it is intended for laptops or all-in-one systems with dedicated cooling. In a head-to-head comparison of pure capability, the Arc A770M is the obvious choice. In a comparison of deployment flexibility, the T400's low power and small footprint make it a viable option for systems that cannot accommodate a high-TDP part. The benchmark data does not directly measure power efficiency, but the TDP figures in the specification sheet suggest the T400 is designed for a different use case.

For anyone building a system where the GPU must fit into a single-slot, low-power envelope, the T400 is the only choice that matches that requirement. For anyone prioritizing compute performance, the Arc A770M is the clear winner. The database shows no scenario where the T400 outperforms the Arc A770M in a shared test, so the verdict is straightforward: Intel wins on performance, NVIDIA wins on power economy.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A770M wins in every benchmark category where both GPUs have recorded data. That includes Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the only two tests in the shared set. The Arc A770M also holds a much richer benchmark profile, with PassMark scores that the T400 lacks entirely. In PassMark G3D, the Arc A770M scores 11,774, which is a strong result for a mobile GPU. Its PassMark GPU compute score of 4,778 and its DirectX 12 score of 70 further demonstrate its capability in modern graphics workloads. The T400 has no PassMark data, so no comparison is possible, but the absence of those results suggests the T400's benchmark coverage is limited to compute-oriented tests.

The T400 does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head set, but it does win on power consumption. The database lists the T400 at 30 W TDP, while the Arc A770M is listed at 120 W. That is a 4x difference in thermal design power. For a system with a 200 W power supply, the T400 is the only feasible option. The T400 also has a smaller die size (200 mm² versus 406 mm²) and far fewer transistors (4,700 million versus 21,700 million), which correlates with its lower power draw. The T400's single-slot form factor and lack of power connectors make it easy to install in expansion slots with minimal clearance.

In terms of use cases, the Arc A770M is suited for gaming and compute-heavy tasks where performance matters more than power efficiency. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth provide ample headroom for large textures and data sets. The T400, with 2 GB of GDDR6 memory and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, is more appropriate for basic display output, light 2D workloads, or as a secondary GPU for multi-monitor setups. The benchmark data does not show the T400 winning any compute test, so its role is best described as a low-power display adapter rather than a compute accelerator.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Intel Arc A770M is faster, scoring 89,494 points versus 17,039 points for the NVIDIA T400, a 425.2% difference.

Q: Does the NVIDIA T400 win any shared benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows 2 wins for the Intel Arc A770M and 0 wins for the NVIDIA T400 across the two tests that both GPUs have recorded.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Intel Arc A770M has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory. The Arc A770M also has a wider 256-bit bus versus the T400's 64-bit bus, resulting in 512.0 GB/s versus 80.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The Intel Arc A770M has a TDP of 120 W, while the NVIDIA T400 has a TDP of 30 W. The T400 uses no external power connectors and suggests a 200 W PSU, while the Arc A770M's power connector requirements are not specified in the database.

Q: Are these GPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: They are close but not identical. The Intel Arc A770M is at the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA T400 is at the 60th percentile.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The Intel Arc A770M uses 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, while the NVIDIA T400 uses 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The Arc A770M is built on a 6 nm process, and the T400 is on a 12 nm process.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A770M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-512 chip, using a 6 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Alchemist generation of Arc 7 Mobile GPUs. The NVIDIA T400 uses the Turing architecture, specifically the TU117 chip, on a 12 nm process at TSMC, and belongs to the Quadro Turing generation. The process node difference is significant: 6 nm versus 12 nm means the Intel chip packs transistors roughly twice as densely, with 53.4 million transistors per mm² versus 23.5 million per mm². The Arc A770M has 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, while the T400 has 4,700 million on a 200 mm² die.

The shading resources differ drastically. The Arc A770M has 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 raster output units. It also includes 32 ray tracing cores. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no dedicated ray tracing cores. The raw throughput numbers reflect this: the Arc A770M delivers 16.79 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the T400 delivers 1,094.4 GFLOPS (roughly 1.09 TFLOPS). The Arc A770M also has a much higher pixel rate at 262.4 GPixel/s versus 22.80 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 524.8 GTexel/s versus 34.20 GTexel/s.

The API support also differs. The Arc A770M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (feature level 12_2), while the T400 supports DirectX 12 (feature level 12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the Intel part's higher DirectX feature level indicates support for advanced ray tracing and mesh shading features. The T400 has no tensor cores or RT cores listed, which means it lacks hardware acceleration for these workloads. The Arc A770M's memory architecture is also far more robust, with 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the T400 has 2 GB on a 64-bit bus.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The Intel Arc A770M has a base clock of 1650 MHz and a boost clock of 2050 MHz, while the NVIDIA T400 has a base clock of 420 MHz and a boost clock of 1425 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the Arc A770M runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while the T400 runs at 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective. The Arc A770M has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus the T400's 2 GB, 64-bit bus, and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth.

The TDP is a major differentiator: 120 W for the Arc A770M versus 30 W for the T400. The slot width also differs, with the Arc A770M listed as IGP (integrated graphics package) and the T400 as single-slot. The T400 has no power connectors and suggests a 200 W PSU, while the Arc A770M lists no power connector details. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for the Arc A770M and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the T400. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the Arc A770M, while the T400 has 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

The production status is end-of-life for both. The T400 has a release date of May 5, 2021, while the Arc A770M has no recorded release date. The T400 lists a predecessor (Quadro Volta) and successor (Workstation Ampere), while the Arc A770M has neither. The T400 has no launch MSRP listed, and neither does the Arc A770M. The transistor density, die size, and process node all differ, as covered in the architecture section. In short, every measurable hardware specification favors the Intel Arc A770M except for power consumption and physical footprint, where the NVIDIA T400 is clearly more efficient.