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 A530M Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£820VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):65 W

Intel ARC A530M 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.

4.6/10

Overall score

Score
4.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

90%

4.6

Technical score

10%

?

User score

▼Worse than 91% of graphics cards
5.1

Value for money

Value for money
5.1/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

4.6

Overall score

30%

6.2

Price

▼Worse than 99%
4.6

Technical score

Technical score
4.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

44%

2.5

Performance

24%

3.5

Memory

12%

7.9

Power & Cooling

11%

9.0

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity & Media

▼Worse than 89%
?

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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image
Best prices
    N/A~ £820
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 A530M

Technical score
Technical score
4.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

44%

2.5

Performance

24%

3.5

Memory

12%

7.9

Power & Cooling

11%

9.0

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity & Media

4.6
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel ARC A530M 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
5.1/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

4.6

Overall score

30%

6.2

Price

5.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
5,902 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 5,902 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 83.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
?
PassMark (G3D) result
8,013 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 8,013 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 88.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,931 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,931 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 90.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
3.99 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 3.99 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 90.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% 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
128 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 69.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
224 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 224 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 83.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% 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
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 8.3% of graphics cards and equal to 88.9% 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
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.5% of graphics cards and equal to 47.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
20 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 20 Gbps, which is faster than on 42.9% of graphics cards and equal to 7.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
65 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 65 W, which is lower than that of 95.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
95 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 95 W under peak load, which is lower than 90.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
95 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 95 W, which is lower than that of 90.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
65 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

Intel ARC A530M vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 69.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    65 W vs 215 W
  • 57.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (95 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    95 W vs 225 W
  • 48 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (192 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    192 vs 144
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 2.08x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 48 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (192 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    192 vs 144
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 2.08x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 69.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    65 W vs 215 W
  • 57.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (95 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    95 W vs 225 W
  • 56.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (95 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    95 W vs 220 W
  • 48.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1300 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,300 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 28 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (12 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    12 vs 40
  • 53.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (900 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    900 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 28 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (12 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    12 vs 40
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 41.2% worse value for money
    Intel ARC A530M has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.1 vs 7.2).
    5.1 vs 7.2
  • 4.22x less popular
    Intel ARC A530M is less popular than the average graphics card (1 vs 4.2).
    1 vs 4.22
  • 54.7% more expensive
    Intel ARC A530M is more expensive than the average graphics card (£820 vs £530).
    £820 vs £530
  • 48.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1300 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,300 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 28 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (12 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    12 vs 40
  • 53.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (900 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    900 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 28 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (12 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    12 vs 40
  • 67.3% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (124.8 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    124.8 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 61.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (62.4 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    62.4 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 82.3% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (4 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    3.99 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 64.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (8013 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    8,013 points vs 22,653 points
  • 59.8% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (5902 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    5,902 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 75.7% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2931 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    2,931 points vs 12,074 points
  • 73.1% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (8 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    7.99 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 82.6% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (4 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    3.99 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 2,816 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,536 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,536 vs 4,352
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    128 bit vs 256 bit
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 50% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (224 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    224 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
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (8 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    8 MB vs 24 MB
  • 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.
    1.0 vs 8
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • 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
  • 49.8% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (11500 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    11,500 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 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.
  • 18 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (85 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    85 °C vs 67 °C
  • 8 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (45 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    45 °C vs 37 °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

W
windowscentral.com
20/04/2024
Summary of the review
Lenovo LOQ 15IAX9I gaming laptop review: Failing to beat the handhelds
L
laptopmedia.com
09/05/2024
Summary of the review
Intel Arc Laptop GPUs Showdown – They're FAST But What About Real-World Gaming Performance!?
L
laptopmedia.com
09/05/2024
Summary of the review
Intel Arc Laptop GPUs Showdown | LaptopMedia France
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel ARC A530M

  • Competitive value for money in ultra-budget gaming laptops, often priced around $500–$600.
  • Strong performance in modern DirectX 12 and Vulkan titles, sometimes outperforming the RTX 3050 in specific benchmarks.
  • Supports modern features like hardware ray tracing, AV1 encoding/decoding, and XeSS AI upscaling.
  • Good connectivity options with support for up to four displays and DisplayPort 2.0.
  • Efficient enough for casual use, video streaming, and lighter productivity tasks.

What we don't like about Intel ARC A530M

  • Significantly lower real-world gaming performance in older DirectX 9, 11, and OpenGL titles compared to entry-level NVIDIA cards.
  • Unstable frame rates and stuttering in popular competitive games like Counter-Strike 2.
  • Inconsistent drivers that can lead to graphical errors, crashes, or games failing to launch.
  • Higher power consumption and heat generation reported by some users during intensive gaming sessions.
  • Niche ecosystem leads to potential difficulties in sourcing replacement parts for repairs compared to mainstream NVIDIA or AMD models.

Verdict

The Intel Arc A530M is a lower-mid-range mobile graphics card built on the 6nm TSMC process and Xe-HPG architecture, featuring 12 Xe-cores, 1536 shading units, and 12 dedicated ray tracing units. It typically operates with 4GB or 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 224 GB/s and a boost clock speed of up to 1300 MHz within a 65W to 95W TGP range. Main pros include its competitive price-to-performance ratio in budget laptops, support for modern technologies like XeSS AI upscaling and AV1 hardware encoding, and solid 1080p gaming performance in well-optimized titles. However, it faces cons such as inconsistent driver optimization for older DirectX 11 or 9 games, high heat output in thin laptop chassis, and limited ray tracing performance that often struggles to maintain playable frame rates.

Compare Intel ARC A530M 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 A530M and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found