Intel Arc A350M Mobile Graphics Card Pictured & Tested

[Uskompuf]

The recently announced Intel Arc A350M mobile graphics card is now shipping with it's recent debut in the South-Korean exclusive Samsung Galaxy Book2 Pro laptop. The A350M is the entry-level Arc Alchemist skew from Intel featuring an ACM-G11 GPU with 768 shaders and 4 GB of GDDR6 video memory. This specific Samsung Galaxy Book2 Pro model is also equipped with an Intel Core i5-1240P Alder Lake processor and 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory. The Intel video drivers (30.0.101.132) included with the laptop appear to have issues correctly identifying the card however newer versions are available which should address this.

The laptop was tested in various synthetic and gaming scenarios with the Arc A350M (30 W) performing anywhere from 40% to 60% faster than the NVIDIA MX450 (25 W). The Intel A350M reached a maximum boost clock of 2.2 GHz during gaming with the card offering adequate performance in eSports and older titles. The Galaxy Book2 Pro model with 32 GB of memory and a 1 TB SSD (NT950XEE-XD72S) is currently available to purchase directly from Samsung Korea for 2,520,000 KRW (2,054 USD). Intel has noted that more laptops featuring Arc Alchemist mobile graphics should be launching worldwide in the coming weeks.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[john_]

Slow, but fast enough to convince OEMs to ignore Nvidia's MX options.
MX series is dead after Ryzen 6000 and the new Intel ARC series.

 

[usiname]

Slow, but fast enough to convince OEMs to ignore Nvidia's MX options.
MX series is dead after Ryzen 6000 and the new Intel ARC series.

MX450 is much faster than A350m if you are not aware.

 

[Denver]

It is difficult to compare laptop components, there is a wide variation in TDP, design and cooling.

But from what I've seen the intel GPU has a lot of severe software bugs.

 

[Xajel]

MX450 is much faster than A350m if you are not aware.

Did you read the first sentence of the second paragraph?

Arc A350M performing anywhere from 40% to 60% faster than the NVIDIA MX450

And have you actually seen the second slide?

 

[john_]

MX450 is much faster than A350m if you are not aware.

Not based on the article, if you are not aware.
The thing is that Intel doesn't need to destroy the MX series. Just to be able to offer an alternative while selling CPUs and chipsets.

 

[usiname]

Did you read the first sentence of the second paragraph?


And have you actually seen the second slide?

Did you know how fast is the igpu in tiger lake/alder lake? Almost two times slower than mx450, many videos as proof on youtube. Do you rmeber the intel's presentation? According them the A370M is 50-52% faster.mx 450 is already much faster, but we speak for A350M - 3xe cores, 25% less than A370M. This make mx450 much faster. Of course if you playing fire strike then yes, A350M is faster, but as I know, fire strike is just video and you can't actually play

 

[watzupken]

When you see 3D Mark results, you can forget about it. The problem with 3D Mark is that it is one of the worst graphic test mainly because of the CPU tests found in Time Spy and Fire Strike. I am pretty sure the CPU contributed significantly to the benchmark results, and not the GPU. I am more incline to look at in game performance. It is not surprising that the gaming result should still be better only because this is tested at 1080p and this is going to be CPU limited, but I doubt the advantage over the MX450 is going to be as big as they claimed.

 

[holyprof]

I believe it when I see real tests from a reputable source instead of Intel's cherry picked tests.
Still, it's nice that Intel finally has something useful to put into laptops GPU wise. I'm an AMD fan but have always bought Intel-based laptops because they're still ahead of AMD as a whole platform. Only recently have AMD put out some nice APU based laptops but Intel is ready to answer that with the Xe architecture.
So I'll continue to buy or build AMD based desktop with Nvidia GPU and Intel based laptop with (Intel, AMD or Nvidia) GPU.

 

[catulitechup]

this is a review from bullslab

and this is videocardz article about this:

Intel Arc A350M GPU has finally been tested, slower than GTX 1650, up to 2.2 GHz clock - VideoCardz.com

Intel Arc A350M tested on Samsung Galaxy Book2 Pro As we have reported earlier today, Intel Arc A-Series of mobile GPUs are currently exclusively available for the South Korean market. This is where one may find Samsung Galaxy Book2 Pro laptop optionally outfitted with Arc A350M graphics. As it...

videocardz.com

according this will be star aroun 40w % more performance than mx 450 25w*

*https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-mx450-25w.c3657

this stay more or less around gtx 1050ti performance and maybe have similar performance thn mx 450 30.5w 8gbps**

**https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-mx450-30-5w-8gbps.c3717

but more or less 15% less than mx 450 30.5w 10gbps*** and around 20% less geforce gtx 1650 ddr5 desktop****

***https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-mx450-30-5w-10gbps.c3641

****https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-1650.c3366

 

[Steevo]

Unplayable games
Graphics glitches
All for the low price of 2K?

 

[phanbuey]

Unplayable games
Graphics glitches
All for the low price of 2K?

Gotta start somewhere. It's better than the nothing they had before that for the price of 2K.

 

[catulitechup]

apparently dynamic tuning technology on a350m affects performance:

videocardz article

Intel Arc A350M gets significant performance boost in games with Dynamic Tuning Technology disabled - VideoCardz.com

Intel Arc revisited with DTT disabled BullsLab is a South Korean YouTuber who delivered one of the first benchmarks of Intel Arc Alchemist mobile GPUs. Upon revisiting the tests with updated Arc drivers, he discovered that performance is significantly limited by a technology called Intel Dynamic...

videocardz.com

 

[Steevo]

apparently dynamic tuning technology on a350m affects performance:

videocardz article

So the CPU is throttling the GPU performance it looks like, 83C isn't too hot but we don't know ambient and GPU temps either.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Did you know how fast is the igpu in tiger lake/alder lake? Almost two times slower than mx450, many videos as proof on youtube. Do you rmeber the intel's presentation? According them the A370M is 50-52% faster.mx 450 is already much faster, but we speak for A350M - 3xe cores, 25% less than A370M. This make mx450 much faster. Of course if you playing fire strike then yes, A350M is faster, but as I know, fire strike is just video and you can't actually play
View attachment 243470

Careful, your fanboism is showing. I'm not looking up videos as your proof of performance, but the question is how old are those videos? Drivers change and update all the time, at this time is critical that Intel optimize them for this release, so any proof you may have used for reference is likely over a month old. if you cant keep up to date, try harder.

 

[usiname]

Careful, your fanboism is showing. I'm not looking up videos as your proof of performance, but the question is how old are those videos? Drivers change and update all the time, at this time is critical that Intel optimize them for this release, so any proof you may have used for reference is likely over a month old. if you cant keep up to date, try harder.

And you speak for fanboism? Try to live in the reality, 3dmark is not a game and intel havn't fixed their drivers for years, month won't change anything. As I said clearly a370m with 128eu is 55% faster than iris xe 96eu, intel's slides confirm this, A350M with 96eu is 25% slower so 15-20% maximum more performance than the igpu with same EU count. Intel's fanboys dream of some mind-boggling improvement while missing the facts when going from iGPU to mGPU.
Example -
rx 680m is 12 CU - 100%
rx 5500xt is 16 CU - 155%
performance difference - 55% going from iGPU to 115w dGPU
what will happend when you remove 25% of all CUs? Basic mathematics - 116%, this will be the peformance of the 6400xt. Give or take 5%, and you wont see miracle for Intel.
I will laugh at all of you when (IF) intel release their trash, because I knew a year ago what will be the true performance of their dGPU and the more results come out, the more credible what I say seems

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Try to live in the reality, 3dmark is not a game and intel havn't fixed their drivers for years

Fixed, when it comes to the dGPU only, to be clear. 3dmark may not be game, but there really isnt any other performance measures out yet to compare to, so it will suffice in this instance.

See you in the new thread.