Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Arc Graphics 130V

Intel Arc 130V

The Intel Arc Graphics 130V is an integrated graphics adapter that lower-end Intel Lunar Lake family processors employ. This is a direct successor to the Arc 7 iGPU; it has 7 Xe² architecture "cores" running at up to 1,850 MHz and 7 ray tracing units at its disposal.

DirectX 12 Ultimate is fully supported here and the iGPU also supports hardware-decoding a long list of popular video codecs such as h.266 VVC, h.265 HEVC, h.264 AVC, AV1 and VP9. It can drive three SUHD 4320p monitors simultaneously via HDMI 2.1, eDP 1.5 and DP 2.1.

Just like it was with Meteor Lake, Intel taps its Foveros technology to build Lunar Lake chips meaning the iGPU and the CPU cores are found on different dies stacked on top of each other or next to each other.

Performance

Its performance can be vastly different depending on which benchmarks and games one runs. Oftentimes, it isn't much faster than its direct predecessor, the Arc 7. It is clear the 130V isn't fast enough to run most triple-A 2024 games at 1080p. However, it's still more than good enough for an occasional gaming session.

Power consumption

Lunar Lake processors' power consumption figures are relatively modest at around 20 W to 30 W, with up to about a half of that getting consumed by the integrated GPU.

Gen13 / Xe² Series

Arc 140V compare 8 @ 2.05 GHz
Arc 130V 7 @ 1.85 GHz
CodenameLunar Lake iGPU
ArchitectureXe²
Pipelines7 - unified
Raytracing Cores7
Core Speed1850 (Boost) MHz
Memory TypeLPDDR5x
Max. Amount of Memory16 GB
Shared Memoryyes
APIDirectX 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, OpenCL 3.0
technology3 nm
Displays3 Displays (max.), HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 2.1
FeaturesSUHD 4320p60 resolution support, AVC/HEVC/VVC/VP9/AV1 decoding
Date of Announcement24.09.2024
PredecessorArc 7-Core
CPU in Arc 130VGPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
Intel Core Ultra 5 238V8 x 2100 MHz, 17 W? MHz1850 MHz
Intel Core Ultra 5 236V8 x 2100 MHz, 17 W? MHz1850 MHz
Intel Core Ultra 5 228V8 x 2100 MHz, 17 W? MHz1850 MHz
Intel Core Ultra 5 226V8 x 2100 MHz, 17 W? MHz1850 MHz
min. - max.? MHz1850 MHz

Benchmarks

Performance Rating - 3DMark 11 + Fire Strike + Time Spy
3.1 pt (9%)
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Score
min: 3451     avg: 3583     median: 3592 (10%)     max: 3696 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Graphics
min: 3182     avg: 3291     median: 3297 (7%)     max: 3388 Points
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score
min: 29655     avg: 30375     median: 30375 (29%)     max: 31095 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
min: 46732     avg: 48427     median: 48426.5 (12%)     max: 50121 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score
min: 6913     avg: 7523     median: 7656.5 (12%)     max: 7866 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
min: 7536     avg: 8196     median: 8374.5 (8%)     max: 8497 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Graphics
251095 Points (28%)
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score
min: 8815     avg: 9778     median: 10059 (12%)     max: 10178 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU
min: 8129     avg: 9229     median: 9566.5 (7%)     max: 9655 Points
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total +
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total
41881 Points (12%)
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX +
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX
40146 Points (22%)
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 +
3DMark 06
35970 Points (47%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) +
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
16874 points (12%)
Cinebench R11.5 Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit
104.7 fps (34%)
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 122.5     avg: 136.8     median: 139 (8%)     max: 145.8 fps
Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit
97.8 % (98%)
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
23.5 fps (9%)
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
53.4 fps (10%)
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
141.2 fps (10%)
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official Medium Offscreen 1080
min: 104.6     avg: 188.8     median: 104.6 (3%)     max: 315 fps
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official High Offscreen 2160
3.6 fps (1%)
Geekbench 6.4 - Geekbench 6.4 GPU OpenCL
min: 23879     avg: 25476     median: 25608 (7%)     max: 26789 points
Geekbench 6.4 - Geekbench 6.4 GPU Vulkan
min: 19700     avg: 26700     median: 27529 (7%)     max: 34432 points
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit - LuxMark v2.0 Room GPU
678 Samples/s (2%)
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit - LuxMark v2.0 Sala GPU
1538 Samples/s (3%)
ComputeMark v2.1 - ComputeMark v2.1 Result
5988 points (5%)
Power Consumption - Furmark Stress Test Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 27.5     avg: 30.5     median: 29.5 (4%)     max: 35.4 Watt
05101520253035404550Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption 150cd *
min: 41.6     avg: 43.5     median: 43.8 (14%)     max: 44.6 Watt
05101520253035404550Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 38.2     avg: 40.9     median: 41.3 (5%)     max: 42.8 Watt
051015202530354045Tooltip
Power Consumption - Power Efficiency - Cyberpunk 2077 ultra
min: 0.4797     avg: 0.5     median: 0.5 (2%)     max: 0.526 fps per Watt
- Range of benchmark values
red legend - Average benchmark values
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

low 1920x1080
27.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
18.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
12.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
9.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
18.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
18.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
16.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
15.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
14.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
13.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
11.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
11.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
16.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
15  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
14.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
13.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080 cinem.
8.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080 cinem.
7.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
F1 24

F1 24

2024
low 1920x1080
66 72.6 ~ 69 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
56 66.1 ~ 61 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
41 52.1 ~ 47 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
12 16.4 ~ 14 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
13.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
11.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
9.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
22.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
20.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
17.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
13.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
17.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
13.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
25.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
22.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
16.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
15.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
33.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
25.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
23.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
22  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
med. 1920x1080
162.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
103.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
101.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
52.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
40.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
26.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
19.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
79.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
62.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
55.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
44.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
12  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
11  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
8.7  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
7.1  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
15.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
12.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
11.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
17.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
16.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
14.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
11.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
99.8  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
55.5  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
31  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
25.4  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
33  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
32  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
29  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
50.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
47.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
28.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
21.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
33.6 38.3 39.3 41.2 41.6 ~ 39 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
26.2 30.5 31.3 31.9 32.8 ~ 31 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
23.5 26.9 27.8 28.5 28.6 ~ 27 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
23.1 23.9 24.9 25.1 25.6 ~ 25 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset (FSR off) 1280x720
59
Ray Tracing Ultra Preset (DLSS off) 1920x1080
8.6
30min Start Ultra Preset (FSR off) 1920x1080
20.1
21.7
20.1
16.5
22
low 1920x1080
27.3 29.9 29.9 31.7 36.1 ~ 31 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
23.9 24.6 24.7 25 29.6 ~ 26 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
20.3 20.8 21.5 23.8 25.8 ~ 22 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
18.6 20.4 21.3 25.2 ~ 21 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset SMAA 1280x720
49.7
Low Preset FSR 2.2 Balanced 1920x1080
32.6
F1 22

F1 22

2022
low 1920x1080
91.2  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
81.3  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
59.7  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
18  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Ultra Low Preset 16xAF TAA 1280x720
151.2
low 1920x1080
61.1  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
43.6  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
27.2  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
21.2  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
Additional Benchmarks
Lowest Preset (DX12) 1280x720
101.7
Strange Brigade

Strange Brigade

2018
low 1280x720
176.4 192.6 192.9 205 ~ 192 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
70.7 73.6 73.8 76.7 ~ 74 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
58.3 60.3 61.5 62 ~ 61 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
48.2 50.6 51.8 51.8 ~ 51 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Far Cry 5

Far Cry 5

2018
low 1280x720
73 80 ~ 77 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
41 45 ~ 43 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
37 41 ~ 39 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
33 38 ~ 36 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1280x720
38.4 39.7 43.3 44.5 47.4 ~ 43 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
31 32.6 33.5 36.7 38.4 ~ 34 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
27.1 27.7 29.7 32.8 38.9 ~ 31 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1280x720
73.4 73.4 73.5 74.6 75.2 ~ 74 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
38.1 40.8 41.3 41.4 42.4 ~ 41 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
27.9 28.3 29.2 30 30 ~ 29 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1280x720
90.9 91.2 94.2 98 100.3 ~ 95 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
82.8 84.1 84.4 85 87.4 ~ 85 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
67.6 75.8 76.8 78.5 78.6 ~ 75 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
65.3 72.6 78.1 78.1 82.9 ~ 75 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
GTA V

GTA V

2015
low 1024x768
141.9 150.4 151.2 151.5 153 ~ 150 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
120 131.1 132.4 133.6 146.4 ~ 133 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
44.2 51.4 58.1 60.2 62.8 ~ 55 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
20.8 21.1 22.7 23.9 24.5 ~ 23 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Normal/Off 4xAF 1920x1080
135.1
112.3
Lowest Settings possible 1920x1080
120.3
147.2
132.1
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
Until Dawn27.618.612.39.68
God of War Ragnarök18.718.516.215.7
Final Fantasy XVI14.713.611.711.5
Space Marine 216.41514.713.2
Star Wars Outlaws8.567.3
F1 2469614714
Senua's Saga Hellblade 213.211.79.12
Ghost of Tsushima22.520.817.813.6
Dragon's Dogma 217.613.1
Horizon Forbidden West25.522.116.315.1
Helldivers 233.425.623.522
Prince of Persia The Lost Crown162.6103.8101.5
Ready or Not52.540.826.519.9
The Finals79.662.955.344.8
Avatar Frontiers of Pandora12118.77.1
Alan Wake 215.112.611.2
Lords of the Fallen17.116.114.311.4
Total War Pharaoh99.855.53125.4
Assassin's Creed Mirage333229
Counter-Strike 250.747.128.321.4
Cyberpunk 2077 2.2 Phantom Liberty39312725
Baldur's Gate 331262221
F1 2291.281.359.718
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands61.143.627.221.2
Strange Brigade192746151
Far Cry 577433936
X-Plane 11.11433431
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark744129
Dota 2 Reborn95857575
GTA V1501335523
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps
12
7
8
2
13
9
5
2
19
7
3
18
3
2






For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

search for model:
v1.33
log 22. 02:00:41

#0 ran 0s before starting gpusingle class +0s ... 0s

#1 no ids found in url (should be separated by "_") +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Mon, 19 May 2025 05:31:39 +0200 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#4 composed specs +0.039s ... 0.039s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.039s

#6 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.039s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 12695 +0.03s ... 0.069s

#8 got single benchmarks 12695 +0.021s ... 0.09s

#9 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.091s

#10 min, max, avg, median took s +0.598s ... 0.689s

#11 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.689s

#12 Got 217 rows for game benchmarks. +0.04s ... 0.729s

#13 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.729s

#14 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.016s ... 0.744s

#15 benchmarks composed for output. +0.197s ... 0.941s

#16 return log +0.003s ... 0.945s

Notebook reviews with Intel Arc Graphics 130V graphics card

Acer Aspire 14 AI review: Basic home and office laptop done right

Acer Aspire 14 AI review: Basic home and office laptop done right

This inexpensive laptop can do it all for students or basic office needs with its efficient processor and long battery life. If you do even a bit of graphics ed...
Intel Core Ultra 5 226V | Intel Arc Graphics 130V | 14.00" | 1.4 kg
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED in review

Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED Review: Affordable, quieter, and long lasting thanks to Lunar Lake

In addition to the AMD model, Asus is now also launching the compact Vivobook S 14 OLED with the latest Intel Lunar Lake processor. We focus on the performance ...
Intel Core Ultra 5 226V | Intel Arc Graphics 130V | 14.00" | 1.3 kg
Samsung Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 laptop review - The large OLED convertible benefits from Intel Lunar Lake

Samsung Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 laptop review - The large OLED convertible benefits from Intel Lunar Lake

Samsung has given its large 16-inch Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 convertible the latest Lunar Lake processor from Intel, which comes with lots of advantages. Apart from...
Intel Core Ultra 5 226V | Intel Arc Graphics 130V | 16.00" | 1.7 kg
Acer Swift 14 AI review: The first laptop with the Arc Graphics 130V

Acer Swift 14 AI review: The first laptop with the Arc Graphics 130V

Acer's Swift 14 AI is a compact and lightweight multimedia laptop which has access to Intel's brand-new and pretty efficient Lunar Lake architecture. The Arc Gr...
Intel Core Ultra 5 226V | Intel Arc Graphics 130V | 14.00" | 1.3 kg

Acer Aspire 14 AI N24Q14: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.4 kg
  External Review » Acer Aspire 14 AI N24Q14

Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA

Asus Vivobook S14 Q423: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Asus Vivobook S14 Q423

Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU

Asus ZenBook S14 OLED UX5406SA: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.2 kg
  External Review » Asus ZenBook S14 OLED UX5406SA

Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » Portable Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED laptop is phenomenal value as it is now 47% cheaper than list price

Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-51-58TU: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » Acer Swift 14 AI Lunar Lake laptop with long battery life and 32 GB RAM is now $300 cheaper

Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » Asus Vivobook S 14 (S5406) OLED laptop with 17-hour battery life drops back to record low price after 33% cut

   » Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED becomes one of the best value laptops around as price drops 42% to new historic low

   » Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED laptop with 32 GB of RAM and super long battery life enjoys 33.3% price cut

   » Long-lasting Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED laptop with efficient Lunar Lake APU is back on sale

   » Asus Vivobook S 16 (M506KA) and Vivobook S 14 (M5406WA) debut with new AMD Krackan Point APUs and OLED displays

   » Asus Vivobook S 16 (S5606CA) launched with latest Intel Core Ultra 200H Arrow Lake mobile CPUs and Lumina OLED display

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo

» Comparison of GPUs
Detailed list of all laptop GPUs sorted by class and performance.

» Benchmark List
Sort and restrict laptop GPUs based on performance in synthetic benchmarks.

» Notebook Gaming List
Playable games for each graphics card and their average FPS results.

Class 1

Class 2

Radeon PRO W6600M *

Class 3

Arc Graphics 3-core (Arrow Lake) *
Arc Graphics 2-core (Arrow Lake) *
UHD Graphics 32EUs
UHD Graphics 750

Class 4

* Approximate position of the graphics adapter

Klaus Hinum (Update: 2024-11- 6)