FPSVersusArc Pro A30M vs GeForce GTX 950
Performance score
GeForce GTX 950 is 3% faster than Arc Pro A30M by our estimate.
The score is our own estimate from the specs (core count, clock, architecture), not FPS from benchmarks. 100 = the fastest card in our database.
Real tests
What the test measures
Blender is a popular free 3D graphics program. The test makes the device render three ready-made 3D scenes (light, shadows, reflections) and counts how many render passes it finishes per minute. The higher the number, the faster the device handles heavy work: 3D, video editing, photo processing. On a CPU the test loads all cores at once, so it shows the chip's full power; on a graphics card it shows its compute strength.
GPU rendering (Blender)
Median of real test runs on users' computers. It does not show FPS in games. Data updated: 31.10.2026.
Overview
| Arc Pro A30M | GeForce GTX 950 | |
|---|---|---|
| Score (0–100) | 5.32 | 5.48 |
| Ranking position | 220 | 213 |
| Power efficiency (0–100) | no data | 29.19 |
| Manufacturer | Intel | NVIDIA |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Architecture | Xe (Alchemist) | Maxwell |
Specifications
| Arc Pro A30M | GeForce GTX 950 | |
|---|---|---|
| Shader cores | 1024 | 768 |
| Base clock | no data | 1024 MHz |
| Boost clock | 1500 MHz | 1188 MHz |
| FP32 TFLOPS (calculated) | 3.07 | 1.82 |
| Hardware ray tracing | yes | no |
Video memory
| Arc Pro A30M | GeForce GTX 950 | |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory bus | 64 bit | 128 bit |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 105 GB/s |
Power and connection
| Arc Pro A30M | GeForce GTX 950 | |
|---|---|---|
| Board power | 35–50 W | 90 W |
Pros and cons
Arc Pro A30M
- more VRAM: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- has hardware ray tracing
GeForce GTX 950
- 3% higher overall score
Other comparisons
Visitor rating
Questions and comments
Share your experience, ask a question or tell us about a mistake on this page: Arc Pro A30M / GeForce GTX 950.
No comments yet — be the first.