OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

Intel ARC A350M Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£1,140VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:64 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):25 W

Intel ARC A350M Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

4.5/10

Overall score

Score
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
Score components

90%

4.5

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 92% of graphics cards
4.5

Value for money

Value for money
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

4.5

Overall score

30%

4.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
4.5

Technical score

Technical score
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components

44%

2.9

Performance

24%

2.4

Memory

12%

7.9

Power & Cooling

11%

9.1

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

7.8

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 90%
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image
Best prices
    N/A~ £1,140
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card Intel ARC A350M

Technical score
Technical score
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components:

44%

2.9

Performance

24%

2.4

Memory

12%

7.9

Power & Cooling

11%

9.1

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

7.8

Connectivity & Media

4.5
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel ARC A350M has a popularity score of 1 point, which is lower than that of 57.7% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

4.5

Overall score

30%

4.5

Price

4.5
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
3,050 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 3,050 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 92.8% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
368 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 368 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 82.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
2,600 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 2,600 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 97.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,617 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,617 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 93.5% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
3.38 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 3.38 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 91.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 88% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
GDDR version
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 15.9% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
64 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 64 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 97.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
112 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 112 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 94.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.3% of graphics cards and equal to 52.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 76.7% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.6% of graphics cards and equal to 77.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.7% of graphics cards and equal to 79.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91.8% of graphics cards and equal to 5.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 91% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2, which is more advanced than on 66.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 21.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
25 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 25 W, which is lower than that of 99% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
35 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 35 W under peak load, which is lower than 98.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
35 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 35 W, which is lower than that of 98.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
35 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

Intel ARC A350M vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 88.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (25 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    25 W vs 215 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 84.4% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (35 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    35 W vs 225 W
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2 vs 1.4a).
    2.0 vs 1.4a
  • 84.1% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (35 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    35 W vs 220 W
  • 46.8% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (157 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    157 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
    1:4 vs 1:64
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 46.8% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (157 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    157 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2 vs 1.4a).
    2.0 vs 1.4a
  • 88.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (25 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    25 W vs 215 W
  • 84.4% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (35 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    35 W vs 225 W
  • 84.1% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (35 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    35 W vs 220 W
  • 192 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    64 bit vs 256 bit
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 34 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (6 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    6 vs 40
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 136 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (48 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    48 vs 184
  • 34 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (6 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    6 vs 40
  • 40.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1150 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,150 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 75% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (112 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    112 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 59.8% worse value for money
    Intel ARC A350M has worse value for money than the average graphics card (4.5 vs 7.2).
    4.5 vs 7.2
  • 2.15x more expensive
    Intel ARC A350M is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,140 vs £530).
    £1,140 vs £530
  • 4.22x less popular
    Intel ARC A350M is less popular than the average graphics card (1 vs 4.2).
    1 vs 4.22
  • 34 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (6 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    6 vs 40
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 136 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (48 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    48 vs 184
  • 34 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (6 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    6 vs 40
  • 40.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1150 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,150 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 74.8% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (96 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    96 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 67.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (52.8 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    52.8 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 40 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (24 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    24 vs 64
  • 12.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2200 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    2,200 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 85% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.4 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    3.38 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 88.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (2600 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    2,600 points vs 22,653 points
  • 79.2% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (3050 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    3,050 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 48 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (96 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    96 vs 144
  • 96% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (368 points vs 9166 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9166 points.
    368 points vs 9,166 points
  • 78.3% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2617 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    2,617 points vs 12,074 points
  • 77.3% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (6.8 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    6.76 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 3,584 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (768 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    768 vs 4,352
  • 85.3% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (3.4 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    3.38 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 192 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    64 bit vs 256 bit
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 75% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (112 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    112 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14000 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (4 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    4 MB vs 24 MB
  • 99.1% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (1.1 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    1.1 vs 128
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • 20% larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (6 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    6 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    1 vs 8
  • 1 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    March 2022
    2,022 vs 2,023
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.6 vs 6.8).
    6.6 vs 6.8
  • 68.6% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (7200 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    7,200 million vs 22,900 million
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1).
    2.0b vs 2.1
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
    No vs yes
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • 5 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (100 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    100 °C vs 95 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

T
techpowerup.com
13/04/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A350M Mobile Graphics Card Pictured & Tested
N
notebookcheck.net
17/07/2022
Summary of the review
Nvidia GeForce MX550 & Intel Arc A350M Review
W
wccftech.com
13/04/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A350M Shows Huge Gaming Performance Improvement With DTT Disabled In Drivers, Still Operates Within TDP Spec
T
tomshw.it
11/04/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A350M, arrivano i test: promettente, ma c'è da lavorare
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
09/05/2024
Summary of the review
Prova di forza delle GPU Intel Arc per laptop - LaptopMedia
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.nl
18/07/2022
Summary of the review
De strijd van de GPU's op instapniveau - Nvidia GeForce MX550 & Intel Arc A350M Review
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel ARC A350M

  • Excellent value for money and performance-to-cost ratio for an entry-level card
  • Supports modern features including AV1 encoding, XeSS upscaling, and hardware ray tracing
  • Operates quietly and is well-suited for thin-and-light laptop designs
  • Strong synthetic benchmark performance, often outperforming the NVIDIA MX450
  • Provides a significant performance leap over standard integrated graphics like Iris Xe

What we don't like about Intel ARC A350M

  • Immature drivers leading to game stutters, low GPU utilisation, and compatibility issues
  • Poor support for legacy games and certain modern titles (e.g., Forza Horizon 5, COD Cold War) fail to launch
  • Significant thermal issues with some users reporting it heats up very quickly
  • Inconsistent real-world gaming performance that can fall behind competing iGPUs like Radeon 680M

Verdict

The Intel Arc A350M is an entry-level mobile graphics card based on the Xe-HPG Alchemist architecture, featuring 6 Xe-cores, 6 Ray Tracing units, and 96 execution engines. Operating with a core clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of up to 2200 MHz, it is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit interface providing a 112 GB/s bandwidth. Main characteristics include a low power consumption range of 25W–35W and hardware support for modern technologies like AV1 encoding and DirectX 12 Ultimate. Its main pros are its suitability for ultra-thin laptops and excellent media engine capabilities for content creators. However, notable cons include entry-level gaming performance that can struggle with demanding AAA titles and a history of driver-related stability and optimization issues.

Compare Intel ARC A350M with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel ARC A350M and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found