Intel Arc A770M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Comparison

Intel Arc A770M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 are two very different mobile graphics solutions, and the benchmark data reflects that divergence clearly. The RTX 3070 dominates in the vast majority of tests, while the Arc A770M posts one spectacular win that reveals a unique strength. This analysis breaks down the numbers to show where each card excels, what the underlying architectures mean for performance, and which type of user should lean toward which GPU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are lopsided, with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 winning 9 out of 10 benchmark comparisons. The largest margin comes in the PassMark G3D test, where the RTX 3070 scores 22,214 against the Intel Arc A770M’s 11,774, a 47% deficit for the Intel part. That is a massive gap in raw 3D rasterization performance, and it sets the tone for most of the comparison.

In compute-oriented workloads, the RTX 3070 also pulls ahead substantially. The PassMark GPU Compute test shows the NVIDIA card scoring 11,195 versus 4,778 for the Arc A770M, a 57.3% difference. Similarly, in Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 3070 logs 112,821 points against 89,494, a 20.7% advantage. For legacy DirectX support, the gap is even more pronounced: the RTX 3070 wins DirectX 10 with 150 points versus 56 (a 62.7% lead) and DirectX 11 with 182 versus 69 (a 62.1% lead). These older API tests highlight NVIDIA’s mature driver stack and compatibility, where Intel’s newer architecture struggles to keep up.

The modern DirectX 12 results are closer but still favor NVIDIA. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 3070 scores 3,162 against the Arc A770M’s 2,278, a 28% lead. In PassMark DirectX 12, the margin narrows to 17.6% (85 versus 70). The pattern suggests that as workloads move to current APIs, the Intel card becomes more competitive, though it still trails.

The one bright spot for the Intel Arc A770M is staggering. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc A770M scores 74,422 against the RTX 3070’s 21,022, a 254% advantage. That is not a small win; it is a dominant blowout, indicating that the Intel architecture’s Vulkan implementation is exceptionally strong, likely due to its tile-based rendering approach that maps well to Vulkan’s low-level control.

Other tests round out the NVIDIA sweep. The RTX 3070 wins DirectX 9 with 247 points versus 178 (27.9% lead), the G2D test with 1,001 versus 711 (29% lead), and even the Steel Nomad result shows a consistent pattern. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the Arc A770M averages 18,383, while the RTX 3070 averages 17,208, though that parity is misleading given the head-to-head results. The Arc A770M’s average is buoyed by its Vulkan outlier, while the RTX 3070 is more consistent across the board.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc A770M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 21,700 million transistors into a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA RTX 3070 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA104 chip, made on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, for a density of 44.4 million per mm². The Intel chip is denser and slightly larger, but that does not translate into overall performance superiority.

The compute resources differ significantly. The Arc A770M has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. NVIDIA’s higher shader count helps in general-purpose and raster workloads, while Intel’s higher TMU and ROP counts are offset by lower clock speeds. The Arc A770M runs at a base of 1650 MHz and boosts to 2050 MHz, while the RTX 3070 operates at 1500 MHz base and 1725 MHz boost. Intel’s clocks are higher, but NVIDIA achieves better real-world performance.

Ray tracing and tensor hardware also differ. The Arc A770M has 32 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 3070 has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores, the latter enabling DLSS and other AI-accelerated features. That tensor core count is a major functional advantage for NVIDIA, even if the benchmark data does not directly test it.

Memory configurations are distinct as well. The Arc A770M offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 3070 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with 448.0 GB/s. Intel’s extra memory and higher bandwidth are useful for large textures and compute workloads, but the RTX 3070 compensates with higher raw compute throughput. The Arc A770M’s FP32 performance is 16.79 TFLOPS, while the RTX 3070 reaches 20.31 TFLOPS. In FP16, the Arc A770M hits 33.59 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RTX 3070 does 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1), meaning Intel’s half-precision performance is superior on paper.

Power and physical design are another split. The Arc A770M is rated at 120 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics package), making it suited for thin-and-light mobile designs. The RTX 3070 is a 220 W dual-slot card requiring a 12-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU, as it is a discrete mobile part with a 242 mm length and 112 mm height. Both support PCIe 4.0 x16, and both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is the clear winner for overall gaming and general GPU performance. It wins 9 of 10 head-to-head tests, with decisive margins in DirectX 10, 11, and G3D benchmarks, and it holds a solid lead in modern DX12 workloads. The 47% advantage in PassMark G3D and 57.3% in GPU Compute are not marginal; they represent a generational gap in execution. If you want a mobile GPU that handles a broad range of games and compute tasks reliably, the RTX 3070 is the choice, provided your system can accommodate its 220 W TDP and dual-slot cooler.

The Intel Arc A770M is not without merit, but its appeal is narrow. The 254% win in Geekbench Vulkan is extraordinary and suggests that for Vulkan-heavy applications—certain games, emulators, or custom workloads—the Arc A770M can outperform the RTX 3070 by a wide margin. Its 16 GB memory is also double the RTX 3070’s 8 GB, which matters for high-resolution textures or large datasets. However, its lower FP32 throughput (16.79 versus 20.31 TFLOPS) and weaker legacy API performance make it a riskier pick for general use.

The average benchmark scores are close (18,383 for Arc, 17,208 for RTX 3070), but that is misleading because the Vulkan outlier inflates Intel’s number. The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the Arc A770M sits at the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX 3070 is at the 61st. In practice, the RTX 3070 is the more consistent performer. For most buyers, the RTX 3070 is the practical recommendation. For a niche user prioritizing Vulkan performance or needing more VRAM, the Arc A770M has a place.

Specification Differences

• Process Node: Intel Arc A770M uses 6 nm (TSMC); NVIDIA RTX 3070 uses 8 nm (Samsung).
• Transistors: Intel has 21,700 million; NVIDIA has 17,400 million.
• Die Size: Intel is 406 mm²; NVIDIA is 392 mm².
• Base Clock: Intel runs at 1650 MHz; NVIDIA at 1500 MHz.
• Boost Clock: Intel boosts to 2050 MHz; NVIDIA to 1725 MHz.
• Memory Size: Intel offers 16 GB GDDR6; NVIDIA offers 8 GB GDDR6.
• Memory Speed: Intel uses 16 Gbps effective; NVIDIA uses 14 Gbps effective.
• Memory Bandwidth: Intel delivers 512.0 GB/s; NVIDIA delivers 448.0 GB/s.
• Shading Units: Intel has 4,096; NVIDIA has 5,888.
• TMUs: Intel has 256; NVIDIA has 184.
• ROPs: Intel has 128; NVIDIA has 96.
• RT Cores: Intel has 32; NVIDIA has 46.
• Tensor Cores: Intel has none; NVIDIA has 184.
• FP32 Performance: Intel is 16.79 TFLOPS; NVIDIA is 20.31 TFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: Intel is 33.59 TFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA is 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: Intel is 120 W; NVIDIA is 220 W.
• Slot Width: Intel is IGP; NVIDIA is dual-slot.
• Power Connectors: Intel has none listed; NVIDIA has 1x 12-pin.
• Suggested PSU: Intel has none listed; NVIDIA has 550 W.
• Dimensions: Intel has none listed; NVIDIA is 242 mm long, 112 mm tall.
• Display Outputs: Intel is portable device dependent; NVIDIA has 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan performance?

A: The Intel Arc A770M wins decisively, scoring 74,422 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the NVIDIA RTX 3070’s 21,022, a 254% advantage.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3070 in DirectX 11?

A: The RTX 3070 scores 182 in PassMark DirectX 11 against the Arc A770M’s 69, a 62.1% lead.

Q: Does the Arc A770M have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the Arc A770M provides 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RTX 3070 offers 448.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Arc A770M is rated at 120 W, while the RTX 3070 is rated at 220 W.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX 3070 has 5,888 shading units, compared to the Arc A770M’s 4,096.

Q: Does the RTX 3070 support tensor cores?

A: Yes, the RTX 3070 has 184 tensor cores; the Arc A770M does not list any tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Arc A770M Wins:

• Vulkan workloads: The 254% lead in Geekbench Vulkan makes it the clear choice for Vulkan-based games or applications. This is a massive, outlier-level advantage that cannot be ignored.
• Memory capacity: With 16 GB versus 8 GB, the Arc A770M is better suited for scenarios requiring large VRAM, such as high-resolution texture packs or compute tasks with big datasets.
• FP16 compute: The Arc A770M’s 33.59 TFLOPS FP16 performance (2:1 ratio) exceeds the RTX 3070’s 20.31 TFLOPS, offering an edge in half-precision workloads.
• Power efficiency: At 120 W TDP versus 220 W, the Arc A770M is more power-efficient, making it viable for slimmer laptops without robust cooling.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Wins:

• Overall gaming: Wins 9 of 10 head-to-head benchmarks, including a 47% lead in PassMark G3D and a 28% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.
• Legacy DirectX: Dominates DirectX 10 (62.7% lead), DirectX 11 (62.1% lead), and DirectX 9 (27.9% lead), ensuring better compatibility with older titles.
• Compute performance: The 57.3% lead in PassMark GPU Compute and 20.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL show clear superiority in general compute.
• Shader throughput: Higher FP32 performance (20.31 TFLOPS versus 16.79 TFLOPS) and more shading units (5,888 versus 4,096) drive better rasterization.
• Feature set: 184 tensor cores enable AI features like DLSS, and 46 RT cores provide more ray tracing hardware than the Arc A770M’s 32.