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 A730M Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£880VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):80 W

Intel ARC A730M 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.

6.3/10

Overall score

Score
6.3/ 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 68% of models
Score components

90%

6.3

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 68% of graphics cards
6.2

Value for money

Value for money
6.2/ 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 87% of models
Score components

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

5.9

Price

â–¼Worse than 87%
6.3

Technical score

Technical score
6.3/ 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 65% of models
Score components

44%

5.2

Performance

24%

5.5

Memory

12%

7.9

Power & Cooling

11%

9.3

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 65%
?

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~ £880
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 A730M

Technical score
Technical score
6.3/ 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 65% of models
Score components:

44%

5.2

Performance

24%

5.5

Memory

12%

7.9

Power & Cooling

11%

9.3

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity & Media

6.3
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 A730M 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
6.2/ 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 87% of models
Score components:

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

5.9

Price

6.2
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
10,107 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 10,107 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 70.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
3,011 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 3,011 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 78.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
9,808 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 9,808 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 85.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
4,160 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 4,160 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 86.3% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
12.6 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 12.6 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 71.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
12 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 12 GB of VRAM, which is more than 45.5% of graphics cards and equal to 16% 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
192 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 50.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.8% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
336 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 336 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 63.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% 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
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% 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
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.4% of graphics cards and equal to 15.7% 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
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21% of graphics cards and equal to 76.8% of graphics cards.
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
10 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 10 Gbps, which is slower than on 63.1% of graphics cards and equal to 1.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
80 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 80 W, which is lower than that of 90.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
80 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 80 W under peak load, which is lower than 91.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
80 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 80 W, which is lower than that of 91.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
80 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

Intel ARC A730M vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 240 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (384 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    384 vs 144
  • 62.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (80 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    80 W vs 215 W
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • 64.4% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (80 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    80 W vs 225 W
  • 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
  • 20.6% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (196.8 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    196.8 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 63.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • 3.52x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (124.9 TFLOPS vs 35.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.5 TFLOPS.
    124.9 TFLOPS vs 35.5 TFLOPS
  • 240 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (384 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    384 vs 144
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • 20.6% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (196.8 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    196.8 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 3.52x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (124.9 TFLOPS vs 35.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.5 TFLOPS.
    124.9 TFLOPS vs 35.5 TFLOPS
  • 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
  • 62.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (80 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    80 W vs 215 W
  • 64.4% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (80 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    80 W vs 225 W
  • 63.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 42.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1100 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,100 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (192 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    192 bit vs 256 bit
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 18.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2050 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    2,050 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • 16 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    24 vs 40
  • 4.22x less popular
    Intel ARC A730M is less popular than the average graphics card (1 vs 4.2).
    1 vs 4.22
  • 16% worse value for money
    Intel ARC A730M has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.2 vs 7.2).
    6.2 vs 7.2
  • 66% more expensive
    Intel ARC A730M is more expensive than the average graphics card (£880 vs £530).
    £880 vs £530
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 42.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1100 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,100 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 16 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    24 vs 40
  • 18.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2050 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    2,050 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 16 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (24 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    24 vs 40
  • 44.2% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (12.6 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    12.6 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 56.7% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (9808 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    9,808 points vs 22,653 points
  • 67.2% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (3011 points vs 9166 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9166 points.
    3,011 points vs 9,166 points
  • 31.1% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (10107 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    10,107 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 65.5% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (4160 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    4,160 points vs 12,074 points
  • 58.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (192 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    192 bit vs 256 bit
  • 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
  • 25% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (336 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    336 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 96.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (4.5 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    4.5 vs 128
  • 50% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (12 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    12 MB vs 24 MB
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 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 Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • 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
  • 37.6% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (406 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    406 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 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.
  • 22 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (89 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    89 °C vs 67 °C
  • 36 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (36 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    36 dB vs 0 dB
  • 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

H
hardwareluxx.de
16/09/2022
Summary of the review
Intels Arc A730M im Medion Erazer Major X10 im Test
(Translated)Show original
C
computerbase.de
23/09/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Arc A730M im Test: Benchmarks in Spielen und Apps
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel ARC A730M

  • Excellent value for 1080p gaming with a high cost-to-performance ratio.
  • Generous 12GB of VRAM provides an advantage in memory-intensive titles compared to entry-level Nvidia/AMD rivals.
  • Strong performance in modern APIs like DirectX 12 and Vulkan.
  • Great for productivity and professional workloads like video transcoding and Photoshop.
  • Continued driver improvements since launch have significantly boosted stability and frame rates.

What we don't like about Intel ARC A730M

  • Inconsistent real-world performance that often lags behind synthetic benchmark results.
  • Poor optimization for older DirectX 11 and legacy titles.
  • Significant frame rate dips and micro-stuttering in certain unoptimized games.
  • Software and driver experience remains less mature and user-friendly than Nvidia or AMD alternatives.
  • Higher power consumption and heat generation compared to some competitors.

Verdict

The Intel Arc A730M is a high-performance mobile discrete graphics card based on the Xe-HPG Alchemist architecture, featuring 24 Xe-cores, 24 ray tracing units, and 3,072 shading units. Built on a 6nm process, it offers 12GB of GDDR6 VRAM on a 192-bit interface with 336 GB/s bandwidth and a typical power range of 80W to 120W. Main pros include its advanced AV1 hardware encoding for creators, a generous VRAM capacity for its class, and strong synthetic performance often comparable to mid-range competitors like the RTX 3060 Mobile. However, common cons include inconsistent real-world gaming performance due to driver optimization issues and a heavy reliance on Resizable BAR (Re-Size BAR) support for peak efficiency.

Compare Intel ARC A730M 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 A730M and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found