AMD Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc Pro B65 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI300 versus the Intel Arc Pro B65. Both cards hold a 50th percentile ranking against all GPUs in the database, and both carry an average benchmark score of zero. The absence of measured performance data means no direct comparison of frame rates, compute throughput, or workload-specific results can be drawn from the database at this time.

What the data does show is a stark contrast in raw computational specifications, which can be interpreted as indicative of relative capability. The AMD Instinct MI300 delivers 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS. In FP16 workloads, the MI300 again leads with 47.87 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), whereas the Arc Pro B65 reaches 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). These figures place the MI300 roughly 3.9 times ahead in FP32 and roughly 1.9 times ahead in FP16, based solely on the recorded specification data.

Texture throughput tells a similar story. The MI300 achieves 1,496.0 GTexel/s, against the Arc Pro B65's 384.0 GTexel/s, a margin of approximately 3.9 times. Pixel rate, however, inverts the comparison: the MI300 records 0 MPixel/s due to having no ROPs, while the Arc Pro B65 delivers 192.0 GPixel/s with 80 ROPs. Memory bandwidth also heavily favors the MI300, which records 5.32 TB/s over an 8192-bit HBM3 interface, versus the Arc Pro B65's 608.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 interface, a difference of roughly 8.7 times in favor of the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 12.29 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc Pro B65, making the MI300 approximately 3.9 times faster in this metric.

Q: What are the memory capacities and types of each card?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus, yielding 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 608.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support PCIe 5.0?

A: Yes, both the AMD Instinct MI300 and the Intel Arc Pro B65 use a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The AMD Instinct MI300 has no display outputs.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each card?

A: The AMD Instinct MI300 is rated at 600 W, while the Intel Arc Pro B65 is rated at 200 W.

Q: Which card has ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 has 20 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI300 lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded specifications, the AMD Instinct MI300 wins decisively in compute-heavy and memory-bandwidth-bound scenarios. Its 14080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and 47.87 TFLOPS FP32 throughput position it for large-scale scientific computing, AI training, and dense matrix operations. The 128 GB HBM3 pool with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth far exceeds the Arc Pro B65's 32 GB GDDR6 at 608.0 GB/s, making the MI300 the clear choice for workloads that demand massive in-memory datasets and rapid data movement, such as large language model inference or high-performance computing simulations.

The Intel Arc Pro B65 wins in graphics-oriented and display-driven applications. It has 80 ROPs and records 192.0 GPixel/s, while the MI300 records 0 MPixel/s with no ROPs. The Arc Pro B65 also includes 20 ray tracing cores, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. These features make it suitable for workstation graphics, rendering, and any task requiring visual output. Additionally, its 200 W TDP and single 8-pin power connector indicate a far more modest power footprint than the MI300's 600 W and dual 8-pin connectors, which may be advantageous in power-constrained environments.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measured specification. The AMD Instinct MI300 uses a 5 nm process node from TSMC, with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Intel Arc Pro B65 also uses a 5 nm TSMC node, but with 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, for a density of 72.1M per mm².

Clock speeds differ substantially. The MI300 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1700 MHz. The Arc Pro B65 runs at a flat 2400 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks also vary: the MI300's memory runs at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective, while the Arc Pro B65's memory runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective.

Shading units, TMUs, and ROPs all differ. The MI300 has 14080 shading units, 880 TMUs, and 0 ROPs. The Arc Pro B65 has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Pixel rates follow the ROP count: 0 MPixel/s for the MI300 versus 192.0 GPixel/s for the Arc Pro B65. Texture rates are 1,496.0 GTexel/s for the MI300 and 384.0 GTexel/s for the Arc Pro B65.

Power and physical specifications diverge as well. The MI300 has a 600 W TDP, dual 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The Arc Pro B65 has a 200 W TDP, a single 8-pin connector, and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The MI300 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the Arc Pro B65 has no recorded dimensions. The MI300 is a dual-slot card? The database does not list a slot width for the MI300, but the Arc Pro B65 is listed as dual-slot. The MI300 has no display outputs, while the Arc Pro B65 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1.

Release dates also differ: the MI300 launched on 2023-01-03, while the Arc Pro B65 is dated 2026-03-31 and has an active production status. The MI300 lists no production status.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI300 is built on the CDNA 3.0 architecture, designed specifically for compute acceleration. Its chip, codenamed Aqua Vanjaram, belongs to the Instinct (MIx) generation and has a predecessor of Radeon Instinct. The architecture prioritizes raw FP32 and FP16 throughput, massive memory bandwidth, and high transistor counts. The MI300 has no ROPs, no ray tracing cores, and no display outputs, which reflects a pure compute-focused design.

The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation, with the chip codenamed BMG-G21. This architecture is built for graphics and professional visualization, as indicated by its 20 ray tracing cores, 80 ROPs, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility. The presence of 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs confirms its role as a display-capable workstation GPU.

The MI300's API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reinforcing that it is not intended for conventional graphics rendering. The Arc Pro B65, by contrast, supports the full modern graphics API stack.

The transistor and die size differences reflect these divergent design goals. The MI300 packs 153,000 million transistors into 1017 mm², a density of 150.4M per mm². The Arc Pro B65 uses 19,600 million transistors across 272 mm², a density of 72.1M per mm². The MI300's higher density and larger die indicate a more complex compute-oriented design. The Arc Pro B65's lower density and smaller die align with a more balanced graphics-and-compute architecture.

Memory architecture further separates the two. The MI300 uses HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus, which is characteristic of high-bandwidth compute accelerators. The Arc Pro B65 uses GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus, which is typical for workstation graphics cards. The MI300's FP16 ratio is 1:1, meaning it does not double FP16 throughput, while the Arc Pro B65's FP16 ratio is 2:1, indicating rate doubling for half-precision workloads.

The MI300's boost clock of 1700 MHz is lower than the Arc Pro B65's 2400 MHz, yet the MI300 still achieves far higher compute throughput due to its massive shader count and memory bandwidth. The Arc Pro B65's higher clocks with fewer shading units yield lower absolute TFLOPS but enable a more conventional graphics pipeline.