AMD Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc Pro B50 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database does not contain overlapping benchmark scores for the AMD Instinct MI300 and the Intel Arc Pro B50. The Instinct MI300 has no benchmark entries, a 0 average benchmark score, and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs. The Arc Pro B50, by contrast, has eight recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 2660, and a percentile ranking of 17.

Because the head-to-head benchmark list is empty and neither card shares a single common test, direct numerical comparison is impossible from the database. The only comparative data available are the Intel card's nearest rivals, which show the Arc Pro B50 sitting at a near tie with the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (2662 average score, delta of -0.1%), a 0.2% deficit against the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M (2664), a 0.6% lead over the NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 (2645), and a 1.1% shortfall versus the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER (2690). These deltas are all within roughly one percent, placing the Arc Pro B50 in a narrow performance band relative to those cards.

The AMD Instinct MI300's 50th percentile ranking indicates it sits at the median of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel Arc Pro B50's 17th percentile places it well below that midpoint. The Arc Pro B50's own benchmark scores show a spread across workloads: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 returns 1604, PassMark G3D returns 12553, PassMark GPU Compute returns 6037, and the DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests return 144, 58, 100, and 64 respectively. The G2D score is 717. These numbers are internally consistent but cannot be mapped to any metrics for the Instinct MI300.

The absence of shared benchmarks means the database offers no head-to-head victories in either direction. The wins counter shows 0 for both cards. What can be stated is the raw specification gap, which is substantial, but the benchmark record itself does not validate that gap with measured performance.

The Verdict

From the database, the AMD Instinct MI300 is the higher-ranking part in terms of percentile position (50 versus 17) and carries vastly larger compute resources. The Intel Arc Pro B50 has actual benchmark scores, while the Instinct MI300 has none recorded. A user requiring verified benchmark results would find data only for the Intel card. A user relying on specifications alone would see the Instinct MI300 as the dominant compute device.

The Arc Pro B50's nearest rival data indicates it performs within roughly one percent of several older or lower-tier NVIDIA parts, including the GT 1030, K1100M, GT 440, and RTX 5070 SUPER. That clustering suggests modest absolute performance. The Instinct MI300, with its 50th percentile, sits at the database's median, which is a higher standing than the Intel card's 17th percentile.

No launch MSRP is recorded for the Instinct MI300. The Arc Pro B50 has a launch MSRP of 349 USD, noted once here.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI300 wins on specification breadth: 128 GB of HBM3 memory versus 16 GB of GDDR6, 8192-bit versus 128-bit memory bus, 5.32 TB/s versus 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 versus 10.65 TFLOPS. It also has 14080 shading units versus 2048, 880 texture mapping units versus 128, and a larger die at 1017 mm² versus 272 mm². The transistor count is 153,000 million versus 19,600 million. These are categorical advantages in every compute-related field.

The Intel Arc Pro B50 wins on practical deployment features. It has display outputs (4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1) while the Instinct MI300 has no outputs. The Arc Pro B50 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Instinct MI300 lists N/A for all three APIs. The Arc Pro B50 is a dual-slot card at 167 mm length, 69 mm height, and 40 mm width, with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Instinct MI300 is 267 mm long and 111 mm high, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and a 1000 W suggested PSU.

The Arc Pro B50 has a production status of Active, while the Instinct MI300 has no recorded production status. The Intel card has a release date of 2025-09-04, the AMD card 2023-01-03.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Instinct MI300 have any recorded benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Instinct MI300 has an empty benchmark list, a 0 average benchmark score, and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs.

Q: What is the Intel Arc Pro B50's average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Arc Pro B50 has an average benchmark score of 2660 and a percentile ranking of 17 against all GPUs.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Pro B50 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The recorded nearest rivals show a -0.1% delta against the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (2662), -0.2% against the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M (2664), +0.6% against the NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 (2645), and -1.1% against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER (2690).

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 has a memory bandwidth of 5.32 TB/s, while the Intel Arc Pro B50 has 224.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B50 support any graphics APIs?

A: Yes, the Arc Pro B50 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Instinct MI300 lists N/A for all three.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Instinct MI300 has a TDP of 600 W, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The Arc Pro B50 has a TDP of 70 W, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI300 uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Instinct (MIx) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B50 uses the BMG-G21 chip built on Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, but the transistor density differs sharply: the Instinct MI300 packs 150.4 million transistors per mm² across a 1017 mm² die, while the Arc Pro B50 has 72.1 million transistors per mm² across a 272 mm² die.

The Instinct MI300 has no raster operations pipelines (0 ROPs), a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s, and a texture rate of 1,496.0 GTexel/s. The Arc Pro B50 has 16 ROPs, a pixel rate of 41.60 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 332.8 GTexel/s. The Instinct MI300 lists no ray tracing cores, while the Arc Pro B50 includes 16 ray tracing cores. Neither card lists tensor cores in the database.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally: the Instinct MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 with a 8192-bit bus, while the Arc Pro B50 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus. The Instinct MI300's memory clock is 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on the Arc Pro B50. Clock speeds also differ: the Instinct MI300 has a base of 1000 MHz and boost of 1700 MHz, while the Arc Pro B50 has a base of 1700 MHz and boost of 2600 MHz.

The API support is a major architectural split. The Instinct MI300 reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating a compute-focused design without graphics output. The Arc Pro B50 reports full support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

| Specification | AMD Instinct MI300 | Intel Arc Pro B50 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | BMG-G21 |

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe2-HPG |

| Generation | Instinct (MIx) | Battlemage (Pro Series) |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | 19,600 million |

| Die size | 1017 mm² | 272 mm² |

| Transistor density | 150.4M / mm² | 72.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1700 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1700 MHz | 2600 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1300 MHz, 5.2 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 128 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory type | HBM3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus | 8192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 5.32 TB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 14080 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 880 | 128 |

| ROPs | 0 | 16 |

| Ray tracing cores | None listed | 16 |

| Pixel rate | 0 MPixel/s | 41.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 1,496.0 GTexel/s | 332.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 47.87 TFLOPS | 10.65 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1) | 21.30 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 70 W |

| Slot width | Not listed | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | 250 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX | N/A | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 167 mm (6.6 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

| Width | Not listed | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Production status | Not listed | Active |

| Release date | 2023-01-03 | 2025-09-04 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 349 USD |

The Instinct MI300 is a compute accelerator with no graphics pipeline, while the Arc Pro B50 is a graphics-capable card with a full API stack and display outputs. The transistor density gap (150.4M vs 72.1M per mm²) indicates the AMD chip uses a much denser design, consistent with its larger die and higher memory bandwidth. The FP16 ratio also differs: the Instinct MI300 runs FP16 at 1:1 with FP32, while the Arc Pro B50 runs FP16 at 2:1, doubling its FP16 throughput relative to FP32.