Key takeaways
- 1080p: Typically 3-8% in favor of the A770. In many games the difference is within a few frames per second.
- 1440p: Typically 6-12%, with larger gaps in games that exceed 8 GB of VRAM.
- Outliers: In memory-hungry titles such as The Last of Us Part I and some open-world games, the A750’s 8 GB can cause much larger drops, with some outlets reporting gaps of 25% or more.
The Arc A750 is the smarter buy for 1080p gaming on a tight budget, because the Arc A770 is usually only about 3-12% faster; pick the A770 16GB if you play at 1440p, use high-resolution textures, or want the extra memory for creative and AI work. In 2026 both are previous-generation cards, so either one only makes sense at a clear discount to Intel’s current Arc B570 and B580.
Intel launched both Alchemist cards on 12 October 2022. They share the same ACM-G10 silicon, the same 225 W power rating and the same connectors, so the differences come down to enabled cores and memory. The A750 launched at $289 and later received an official price cut to $249, while the A770 launched at $329 for the 8 GB version, with Intel’s 16 GB Limited Edition listed at $349.
Our top picks
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you.
Where the Two Cards Differ
| Specification | Arc A750 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Xe-HPG (Generation 12.7) | Xe-HPG (Generation 12.7) |
| Release date | 12 October 2022 | 12 October 2022 |
| Launch MSRP | $289 | $329 |
| Shading units | 3584 | 4096 |
| Boost clock | 2400 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Process | 6 nm | 6 nm |
| TDP | 225 W | 225 W |
| Memory | 8 GB GDDR6 | 16 GB GDDR6 |
| Memory bus | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 16 MB |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |
The A770 enables about 14% more shading units (4096 versus 3584) and doubles the memory to 16 GB. Clocks, bus width, cache and power are identical in this spec sheet. One nuance: Intel’s own 16 GB Limited Edition A770 used faster memory, giving about 560 GB/s of bandwidth, while board partner versions vary. That small bandwidth bump partly explains why the A770’s lead grows at higher resolutions.
Gaming Performance by Resolution
Published reviews agree that the gap is modest. TechPowerUp’s aggregate data, as cited in later comparisons, put the A750 roughly 7% behind the A770. Cultists Network measured about 3% at 1080p and 6% at 1440p in its direct comparison. Digital Trends saw a larger split at 1080p in its suite, with the A770 around 11% ahead of the RTX 3060 while the A750 held only a small lead over it. Benchmark aggregators land in a similar 5-12% range at 1440p.
- 1080p: Typically 3-8% in favor of the A770. In many games the difference is within a few frames per second.
- 1440p: Typically 6-12%, with larger gaps in games that exceed 8 GB of VRAM.
- Outliers: In memory-hungry titles such as The Last of Us Part I and some open-world games, the A750’s 8 GB can cause much larger drops, with some outlets reporting gaps of 25% or more.
As a rough illustration, a game running about 60 fps on the A750 at 1440p medium-high settings would typically run around 64-67 fps on the A770. Results vary with settings, CPU, patch and, especially for Arc, driver version.
Ray tracing
Alchemist’s ray tracing hardware is competitive for its class, often outperforming similarly priced RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 cards in RT-heavy titles. Digital Trends found the A770 16GB about 17% ahead of the RTX 3060 in its ray tracing tests, while the A750 trailed that card. Because ray tracing raises memory use, the A770’s 16 GB helps it more in RT than in raster. Neither card is a strong path-tracing option, but light RT at 1080p with upscaling is realistic on both.
Drivers and Platform Requirements
Arc’s launch was rough, particularly in DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 games. Intel has since delivered large driver improvements for older APIs, and current results are much more consistent than launch-day reviews suggested. A few practical points still apply:
- Resizable BAR is essential. Both cards lose a large amount of performance without it. Digital Trends recorded a 24% drop in one title with ReBAR disabled. Systems need a supporting CPU and motherboard (generally Intel 10th gen or AMD Ryzen 3000 and newer) with ReBAR enabled in the BIOS.
- Older games: Some older or niche titles still run less smoothly than on Nvidia or AMD cards, so check results for the specific games you play.
- Idle power: Alchemist cards are known for relatively high idle power draw unless ASPM settings are configured in the BIOS and Windows.
Upscaling and Frame Generation
Both cards use XMX matrix engines, so they run XeSS in its higher-quality XMX mode rather than the fallback path used on other brands. Intel’s XeSS 2 adds frame generation and low-latency features in supported games, and both cards can also use FSR 3 frame generation where available. Neither supports DLSS or FSR 4. Since both cards share the same feature set, upscaling and frame generation do not separate them; VRAM does.
VRAM: The Real Dividing Line
The A770’s 16 GB is the main reason to pay more. A simple guide for current games:
| Use case | 8 GB (A750) | 16 GB (A770) |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p, medium-high textures | Comfortable | Comfortable |
| 1080p, ultra textures in new AAA | Sometimes limited | Comfortable |
| 1440p, high textures | Often limited | Comfortable |
| Ray tracing at 1080p/1440p | Tight | Better headroom |
| Local AI, 3D rendering, large video projects | Restrictive | Much better |
Power, PSU and Case Fit
Both cards share a 225 W TDP and a 6-pin plus 8-pin connector arrangement, so power planning is identical. Using GPU TDP plus a typical ~125 W gaming CPU plus about 150 W headroom gives roughly 500 W, so a quality 550-600 W PSU is appropriate. Make sure the PSU has both a 6-pin and an 8-pin PCIe cable (a 6+2-pin lead works for either). Both are 2-slot designs; length varies by model, so check the specific card against your case’s GPU clearance.
Creative and AI Workloads
Outside gaming, the gap between the two cards widens. Both include Intel’s media engine with AV1 encoding, which is a strength for streaming and video export. The A770’s 16 GB is far more useful for local AI image generation, larger language models and complex 3D scenes, where an 8 GB card runs out of memory and either fails or slows sharply. Support for Intel GPUs in AI and rendering tools has improved, but it still varies by application, so confirm compatibility for the software you rely on.
Cost per Frame and the 2026 Market
Using launch pricing, with the A750 as 100 and the A770 at about 107 (the midpoint of review data): the A750 at its $249 cut price works out to about $2.49 per performance point, while the A770 16GB at $349 is about $3.26 per point. The A750 wins value clearly unless you need the memory.
New stock of both cards has largely given way to the Battlemage Arc B570 ($219) and B580 ($249) launched in December 2024, which are generally faster, more power-efficient and better behaved with drivers. Used A750 cards usually sell for roughly $120-$170, and A770 16GB cards for roughly $170-$230. At those prices, the A750 is a reasonable budget 1080p card and the A770 16GB is attractive for creators; if prices approach a new B580, the newer card is the better choice.
Pick the A750 If / Pick the A770 If
- Pick the Arc A750 if you game at 1080p, mostly play esports or well-optimized titles, and want the lowest cost per frame.
- Pick the Arc A770 16GB if you play at 1440p, want high textures in new AAA games, use ray tracing, or run AI and rendering workloads that benefit from 16 GB.
- Pick neither if a new Arc B580 or similar current card is within about $30-$50 of your budget.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much faster is the Arc A770 than the A750?
Most reviews put the difference at roughly 3-12%, with the gap smaller at 1080p and larger at 1440p. In games that need more than 8 GB of VRAM, the A770 16GB can pull much further ahead. In lighter games, the two are often within a few fps.
Does the Arc A750 need Resizable BAR?
Yes, both Alchemist cards depend heavily on Resizable BAR. Without it, performance can drop by around a quarter in some games. Check that your CPU and motherboard support it and that it is enabled in the BIOS.
What power supply do the Arc A750 and A770 need?
A quality 550-600 W unit is sufficient for either card with a typical gaming CPU. Both use one 6-pin and one 8-pin PCIe connector. Their 225 W TDP is identical.
Are Arc drivers good now?
They are much better than at launch, especially in DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 titles. Most modern games run well. A few older or less popular games can still behave inconsistently, so check reports for your specific titles.
Should I buy an Arc B580 instead?
If the price difference is small, yes. The B580 launched at $249 with 12 GB of VRAM and is generally faster and more efficient than both Alchemist cards. The A750 and A770 make sense mainly as discounted or used purchases.
