AMD Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc B570 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300 and Intel Arc B570 are built for entirely different roles, and the recorded data makes that split unambiguous. The MI300 is a compute accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and zero rasterization hardware. The Arc B570 is a conventional consumer GPU with full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, plus 18 ray tracing cores and 80 raster operation units. In practical terms, the MI300 wins every raw compute race by enormous margins, while the Arc B570 wins every graphics and everyday-workload race by default, simply because the MI300 cannot render frames at all.

The MI300's advantage is concentrated in throughput metrics. Its FP32 output is 47.87 TFLOPS, which is 4.2 times the Arc B570's 11.52 TFLOPS. Texture rate tells a similar story: 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 360.0 GTexel/s, a 4.2x gap. The MI300 also holds 128 GB of HBM3 memory with 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth, versus the Arc B570's 10 GB of GDDR6 at 380.0 GB/s. That is 13.9 times the bandwidth and 12.8 times the capacity. The MI300's transistor count is 153,000 million on a 1017 mm² die, compared to 19,600 million on 272 mm² for the Arc B570. The MI300 is a data-center class part, and the numbers reflect that positioning.

The Arc B570 wins in power efficiency and practical usability. Its TDP is 150 W against the MI300's 600 W, and its suggested PSU is 450 W versus 1000 W. The Arc B570 uses a single 8-pin connector while the MI300 requires two. The Arc B570 is also an active production product with a launch MSRP of 219 USD, while the MI300 has no launch MSRP in the database and no production status listed. The Arc B570 carries real benchmark scores across ten tests, averaging 20,556 points, while the MI300 has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. The Arc B570 sits at the 65th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a foundry and process node: both are built by TSMC at 5 nm. Beyond that, the architectures diverge completely. The MI300 uses CDNA 3.0, AMD's compute-focused design, on the Aqua Vanjaram chip. The Arc B570 uses Intel's Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G21 chip, part of the Battlemage generation. The MI300 belongs to the Instinct (MIx) product line, while the Arc B570 belongs to Battlemage (Arc 5).

Transistor density is a notable differentiator. The MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors into 1017 mm², yielding 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The Arc B570 has 19,600 million transistors on 272 mm², for 72.1 million per square millimeter. The MI300's density is more than double, reflecting its larger, more complex compute layout.

Core configurations differ sharply. The MI300 has 14,080 shading units and 880 texture mapping units, but zero ROPs. The Arc B570 has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The MI300 has no ray tracing cores listed, while the Arc B570 has 18. The MI300's pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s because it has no rasterization hardware; the Arc B570 delivers 200.0 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The MI300 uses HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 1300 MHz memory clock (5.2 Gbps effective), producing 5.32 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc B570 uses GDDR6 with a 160-bit bus and 2375 MHz memory clock (19 Gbps effective), producing 380.0 GB/s. The MI300's bus width is 51.2 times wider, which is why its bandwidth is an order of magnitude higher despite slower effective memory speed.

Clock behavior differs as well. The MI300 runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost. The Arc B570 runs at 2500 MHz for both base and boost, a fixed clock profile. FP16 processing also differs: the MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS at FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Arc B570 delivers 23.04 TFLOPS at FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The MI300's FP16 performance matches its FP32 exactly, indicating a compute-oriented design. The Arc B570's FP16 is double its FP32, indicating a graphics-oriented design.

Bus interfaces and display outputs separate the two further. The MI300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs. The Arc B570 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and provides 1x HDMI 2.1a plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The MI300 lists no graphics API support (DirectX, OpenGL, Vulkan all N/A), while the Arc B570 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the MI300 and Arc B570. The MI300 has no benchmark scores recorded at all, with an average benchmark score of 0 and no nearest rivals listed. The Arc B570, by contrast, has ten recorded benchmark scores and four nearest rivals.

The Arc B570's benchmark profile shows its strengths and weaknesses. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 2,649 points. Geekbench OpenCL yields 83,514 points, and Geekbench Vulkan yields 96,844 points. Passmark tests show a wide spread: DirectX 9 scores 164, DirectX 10 scores 65, DirectX 11 scores 118, DirectX 12 scores 72. The G2D score is 661, the G3D score is 14,195, and the GPU compute score is 7,281.

The Arc B570's average benchmark score is 20,556. Its nearest rivals, based on average scores, are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile at 20,534 (0.1 percent higher), the Intel Arc A750 at 20,582 (0.1 percent lower), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M at 20,480 (0.4 percent higher), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X at 20,662 (0.5 percent lower). The Arc B570 sits within half a percentage point of all four rivals, indicating that its aggregate performance is tightly clustered with these parts despite the test-by-test variation.

Because the MI300 has no benchmark data, the only quantitative comparison available comes from the specification-level figures in the database. The FP32 throughput gap is the most direct: 47.87 TFLOPS versus 11.52 TFLOPS, a 4.2x difference. Texture rate is also 4.2x higher on the MI300. Memory bandwidth is 5.32 TB/s versus 380.0 GB/s, a 14.0x difference. Memory capacity is 128 GB versus 10 GB, a 12.8x difference. These are the recorded numbers that define the performance separation.

The Arc B570's pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s is entirely absent on the MI300, which records 0 MPixel/s. The Arc B570's ray tracing capability, 18 RT cores, has no counterpart on the MI300. The MI300 has no display outputs, so its output capability is zero in that domain.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, which is 4.2 times the Intel Arc B570's 11.52 TFLOPS.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The MI300 provides 5.32 TB/s through HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus. The Arc B570 provides 380.0 GB/s through GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus. The MI300's bandwidth is 14.0 times higher.

Q: Does the MI300 support ray tracing or standard graphics APIs?

A: No. The MI300 has no ray tracing cores, no ROPs, and lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. It also has no display outputs. The Arc B570 has 18 RT cores, 80 ROPs, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MI300 has a 600 W TDP, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and suggests a 1000 W PSU. The Arc B570 has a 150 W TDP, requires one 8-pin connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU.

Q: How does the Arc B570 perform relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B570's average benchmark score is 20,556. It is 0.1 percent below the Intel Arc A750 (20,582), 0.1 percent above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20,534), 0.4 percent above the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20,480), and 0.5 percent below the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20,662).

Q: What is the release timeline for both products?

A: The MI300 was released on January 3, 2023. The Arc B570 was released on January 15, 2025, and its production status is listed as Active. The MI300 has no production status listed.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split: the AMD Instinct MI300 is for compute workloads that demand massive throughput, while the Intel Arc B570 is for standard graphics and compute on a desktop platform.

The MI300 wins every compute metric recorded in the database by a wide margin. Its FP32 output of 47.87 TFLOPS, texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s, memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s, and memory capacity of 128 GB place it in an entirely different performance class. Its 14,080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface reinforce that position. The lack of display outputs, graphics API support, and rasterization hardware means it cannot function as a conventional GPU. Its 600 W TDP and 1000 W suggested PSU also indicate a data-center or workstation installation profile.

The Arc B570 wins every usability and graphics metric. It has display outputs, full API support, 18 RT cores, 80 ROPs, and a pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s. Its 150 W TDP, single 8-pin connector, and 450 W suggested PSU make it suitable for a standard desktop build. Its benchmark scores place it in a tight cluster with the RTX 3070 Mobile, Arc A750, Quadro M4000M, and Radeon R9 M390X, with deltas under one percent in each direction. Its launch MSRP is 219 USD.

The percentile rankings further separate the two. The MI300 sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the Arc B570 sits at the 65th percentile. This is notable because the MI300 has no benchmark scores, so its percentile is based on the database's evaluation of its specifications, not measured performance. The Arc B570's percentile reflects its recorded average benchmark score of 20,556.

The choice depends entirely on workload. The MI300 is the correct selection for compute-heavy tasks that can use its FP32, FP16, and memory bandwidth advantages. The Arc B570 is the correct selection for any task requiring a display output, graphics API, or ray tracing, and it delivers competitive performance against its nearest rivals at a fraction of the power draw.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products in the database:

• Chip: Aqua Vanjaram (MI300) versus BMG-G21 (Arc B570)
• Architecture: CDNA 3.0 (MI300) versus Xe2-HPG (Arc B570)
• Generation: Instinct (MIx) (MI300) versus Battlemage (Arc 5) (Arc B570)
• Transistors: 153,000 million (MI300) versus 19,600 million (Arc B570)
• Die size: 1017 mm² (MI300) versus 272 mm² (Arc B570)
• Transistor density: 150.4M / mm² (MI300) versus 72.1M / mm² (Arc B570)
• Base clock: 1000 MHz (MI300) versus 2500 MHz (Arc B570)
• Boost clock: 1700 MHz (MI300) versus 2500 MHz (Arc B570)
• Memory clock: 1300 MHz 5.2 Gbps effective (MI300) versus 2375 MHz 19 Gbps effective (Arc B570)
• Memory size: 128 GB (MI300) versus 10 GB (Arc B570)
• Memory type: HBM3 (MI300) versus GDDR6 (Arc B570)
• Memory bus width: 8192 bit (MI300) versus 160 bit (Arc B570)
• Memory bandwidth: 5.32 TB/s (MI300) versus 380.0 GB/s (Arc B570)
• Shading units: 14,080 (MI300) versus 2,304 (Arc B570)
• TMUs: 880 (MI300) versus 144 (Arc B570)
• ROPs: 0 (MI300) versus 80 (Arc B570)
• RT cores: None listed (MI300) versus 18 (Arc B570)
• Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s (MI300) versus 200.0 GPixel/s (Arc B570)
• Texture rate: 1,496.0 GTexel/s (MI300) versus 360.0 GTexel/s (Arc B570)
• FP32: 47.87 TFLOPS (MI300) versus 11.52 TFLOPS (Arc B570)
• FP16: 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) (MI300) versus 23.04 TFLOPS (2:1) (Arc B570)
• TDP: 600 W (MI300) versus 150 W (Arc B570)
• Slot width: Not listed (MI300) versus Dual-slot (Arc B570)
• Power connectors: 2x 8-pin (MI300) versus 1x 8-pin (Arc B570)
• Suggested PSU: 1000 W (MI300) versus 450 W (Arc B570)
• Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 (MI300) versus PCIe 4.0 x8 (Arc B570)
• Display outputs: No outputs (MI300) versus 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 (Arc B570)
• DirectX: N/A (MI300) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2) (Arc B570)
• OpenGL: N/A (MI300) versus 4.6 (Arc B570)
• Vulkan: N/A (MI300) versus 1.4 (Arc B570)
• Length: 267 mm 10.5 inches (MI300) versus 272 mm 10.7 inches (Arc B570)
• Height: 111 mm 4.4 inches (MI300) versus 115 mm 4.5 inches (Arc B570)
• Production status: Not listed (MI300) versus Active (Arc B570)
• Release date: January 3, 2023 (MI300) versus January 15, 2025 (Arc B570)
• Predecessor: Radeon Instinct (MI300) versus Alchemist (Arc B570)
• Launch MSRP: Not listed (MI300) versus 219 USD (Arc B570)
• Percentile vs all GPUs: 50 (MI300) versus 65 (Arc B570)
• Average benchmark score: 0 (MI300) versus 20,556 (Arc B570)