The RX 6700 is the better choice for most gamers who mainly play traditional rasterized games, because it is faster in that kind of workload, draws less power and has 10 GB of VRAM; the Arc A750 makes sense if you value ray tracing and XeSS, can get it noticeably cheaper, and have a modern platform with Resizable BAR enabled. Both are previous-generation budget cards in 2026, so price on the day usually decides the winner.
This matchup is less obvious than it looks. The RX 6700 is the quiet non-XT sibling of the RX 6700 XT, sold mostly through partner cards rather than as a reference design. The Arc A750 was Intel’s first serious attempt at a mainstream gaming GPU, launched in October 2022 at $289. Each card has a clear strength, and the right pick depends on how you play and what system you put it in.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you.
Our Top Picks
Top 3 picks at a glance
How the Two Cards Compare on Paper
| Specification | Radeon RX 6700 | Arc A750 |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Xe-HPG (Generation 12.7) |
| Release date | 9 June 2021 | 12 October 2022 |
| Launch MSRP | No official reference MSRP | $289 |
| Shaders | 2304 | 3584 |
| Boost clock | 2450 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Process | 7 nm | 6 nm |
| TDP | 175 W | 225 W |
| VRAM | 10 GB GDDR6 | 8 GB GDDR6 |
| Memory bus | 160-bit | 256-bit |
| Bandwidth | 320.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
| Cache | 3 MB L2 + 80 MB Infinity Cache | 16 MB L2 |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Size | 267 mm, 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 |
The Arc A750 looks stronger on paper: more shaders, a wider 256-bit bus and 60% more memory bandwidth. Real games tell a different story, because the RX 6700’s 80 MB Infinity Cache and AMD’s more mature drivers extract more performance from fewer resources. The A750’s spec advantage shows up more clearly in synthetic tests and ray tracing.
Raster Performance: RX 6700 Leads
Tom’s Hardware tested a Sapphire RX 6700 10GB around its $299 retail appearance and found it about 24% faster than the Arc A750 in its standard, non-ray-traced test suite. Intel has shipped many driver updates since then, and newer aggregated benchmark data suggests the gap has narrowed in some games, particularly older DirectX 11 titles where early Arc drivers struggled. A fair current summary is that the RX 6700 is typically around 10-25% faster in rasterized games, with the exact number depending on the game mix and API.
Approximate expectations, which vary with settings, CPU and game patch:
- 1080p high/ultra: both cards handle most current games above 60 fps. The RX 6700 tends to be more consistent, with fewer outlier titles where performance collapses.
- 1440p: the RX 6700 can manage many games at high settings in the 50-80 fps range; the A750 is often a step lower and benefits more from XeSS.
- Older DirectX 9/11 games: Arc has improved substantially through driver work, but the RX 6700 remains the safer pick for a large back catalog of older titles.
Synthetic benchmarks like 3DMark Time Spy tend to favour the A750, so be careful with comparison sites that rely heavily on them.
Ray Tracing and Upscaling: Arc’s Strong Suit
The picture reverses with ray tracing. In the same Tom’s Hardware testing, the Arc A750 beat the RX 6700 by roughly 19% in ray-traced games at 1080p medium. Intel’s dedicated RT units are more capable than RDNA 2’s first-generation ray accelerators. That said, neither card is fast enough for heavy ray tracing at 1440p without upscaling.
For upscaling and frame generation:
- Arc A750: supports XeSS using its XMX matrix units, which generally delivers better image quality than older FSR versions. XeSS 2, including XeSS Frame Generation, is supported on Arc A-series hardware in games that implement it.
- RX 6700: supports FSR 2 and FSR 3, including FSR 3 frame generation, plus AMD Fluid Motion Frames at the driver level. FSR 4, AMD’s machine-learning upscaler, targets RX 9000 cards, so the RX 6700 does not get it officially.
- FSR 3 works on the A750 too, which gives Arc owners two upscaler options in many games.
VRAM: 10 GB vs 8 GB
The RX 6700’s 10 GB is a meaningful advantage in 2026. Several recent releases go past 8 GB at high texture settings even at 1080p. A simple VRAM guide for current games:
- 1080p medium-high: 8 GB is generally fine.
- 1080p ultra or 1440p high: 10-12 GB avoids most texture streaming problems.
- 1440p ultra and above: 12 GB or more is better, and both cards will need settings trimmed.
The A750’s wider bus gives it more bandwidth, but bandwidth does not help when the frame buffer itself runs out. If you like high-resolution texture packs, the RX 6700 is the safer card.
Platform Requirements: Resizable BAR Matters for Arc
This is the most important practical difference. Intel’s Arc cards depend on Resizable BAR (ReBAR) to perform properly. Without it, performance can drop sharply and frame pacing gets worse. ReBAR typically requires an Intel 10th-gen or AMD Ryzen 3000 or newer platform with the option enabled in BIOS. If you are dropping a GPU into an older system, the RX 6700 is the safer choice, because it performs fine without Smart Access Memory and simply gains a little with it.
Power, PSU and Case Fit
The RX 6700 is the more efficient card, rated at 175 W against 225 W for the A750, and it needs only a single 8-pin connector. The A750 uses one 6-pin plus one 8-pin. A simple PSU calculation:
- RX 6700: 175 W + ~105 W for a mid-range gaming CPU + ~150 W headroom = about 430 W, so a quality 450-550 W unit works.
- Arc A750: 225 W + ~105 W + ~150 W = about 480 W, so a quality 550 W unit is the safer choice.
Both are dual-slot cards. The RX 6700 is listed at 267 mm long; A750 lengths vary by partner, with Intel’s own Limited Edition being compact enough for most mid-towers. Check your case clearance for the specific model either way. The A750’s idle power has historically been higher than Radeon cards unless ASPM power-saving settings are configured in the BIOS and Windows, which is worth knowing for a PC that spends many hours on the desktop.
Value Math
Using an approximate raster index of RX 6700 = 100 and Arc A750 = about 85 (the middle of the 10-25% gap), and assuming similar prices around the A750’s $289 launch MSRP and the RX 6700’s roughly $299 early retail price:
- RX 6700: $299 / 100 = about $3.00 per performance point
- Arc A750: $289 / 85 = about $3.40 per performance point
The A750 needs to be about 15% cheaper than the RX 6700 to match it on raster value. In ray tracing the math flips, because the A750 is the faster card there. On the used market, the RX 6700 usually sells for around $160-$220 and the A750 around $140-$200, so the gap often lands close to that break-even point.
Pick X If, Pick Y If
| Your situation | Pick |
|---|---|
| 1080p or 1440p, mostly raster games, any platform | RX 6700 |
| Older PC without Resizable BAR | RX 6700 |
| Big library of older DirectX 9/11 games | RX 6700 |
| Small PSU (450-500 W) | RX 6700 |
| Interest in ray tracing at 1080p | Arc A750 |
| Prefer XeSS image quality and the A750 is clearly cheaper | Arc A750 |
| Video encoding with AV1 | Arc A750 (hardware AV1 encode) |
Buyers with a little more budget should also compare current cards such as the Arc B580, Radeon RX 9060 XT and GeForce RTX 5060, which offer newer upscaling and better efficiency with full warranty.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the RX 6700 faster than the Arc A750?
In rasterized games, yes. Tom’s Hardware measured the RX 6700 about 24% ahead at the time of its review, and later driver updates have narrowed but not erased the gap. With ray tracing enabled, the A750 is usually faster.
Does the Arc A750 need Resizable BAR?
Yes, practically speaking. Without Resizable BAR enabled, Arc performance and frame pacing drop significantly. Check that your motherboard and CPU support it before choosing the A750.
Which card is better for 1440p gaming?
The RX 6700 is the stronger 1440p card for most games because of its higher raster performance and 10 GB of VRAM. The A750 can work at 1440p with XeSS enabled, but it has less memory headroom for high textures.
What PSU do I need for the RX 6700 or Arc A750?
A quality 450-550 W unit is enough for the RX 6700, which uses one 8-pin connector. The A750 is better paired with a 550 W unit and needs a 6-pin plus an 8-pin connector.
Are Arc A750 drivers still a problem in 2026?
Intel’s drivers have improved a lot since launch, especially for DirectX 9 and DirectX 11 games. Occasional game-specific issues still appear more often than on AMD or Nvidia cards, so buyers who play many older or niche titles may prefer the RX 6700.
