FireStream 9250 vs Arc A350
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 1024MB VRAM FireStream 9250 and 4GB VRAM Arc A350 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
FireStream 9250 's Advantages
32 additional rendering cores
Arc A350 's Advantages
Released 13 years and 7 months late
Boost Clock2000MHz
More VRAM (4GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (124.0GB/s vs 63.55GB/s)
Lower TDP (25W vs 150W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
FireStream 9250
1000
Arc A350
+207%
3072
Graphics Card
Jun 2008
Release Date
Jan 2022
FireStream
Generation
Alchemist(Arc 3)
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x8
Clock Speeds
-
Base Clock
2000 MHz
-
Boost Clock
2000 MHz
993 MHz
Memory Clock
1937 MHz
Memory
1024MB
Memory Size
4GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR6
256bit
Memory Bus
64bit
63.55GB/s
Bandwidth
124.0GB/s
Render Config
10
Compute Units
-
800
Shading Units
768
40
TMUs
48
16
ROPs
24
-
Tensor Cores
96
-
RT Cores
6
16 KB (per CU)
L1 Cache
-
256 KB
L2 Cache
4 MB
Theoretical Performance
10.00 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
48.00 GPixel/s
25.00 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
96.00 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
6.144 TFLOPS
1000 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
3.072 TFLOPS
200.0 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
768.0 GFLOPS
Board Design
150W
TDP
25W
450 W
Suggested PSU
200 W
1x DVI
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin
Power Connectors
-
Graphics Processor
RV770
GPU Name
DG2-128
RV770 PRO
GPU Variant
ACM-G11
TeraScale
Architecture
Generation 12.7
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
55 nm
Process Size
6 nm
0.956 billion
Transistors
7.2 billion
256 mm²
Die Size
157 mm²
Graphics Features
10.1 (10_1)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
4.1
Shader Model
6.6
