AMD Instinct MI308X vs Intel Arc Pro B70 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no overlapping benchmark scores for the AMD Instinct MI308X and the Intel Arc Pro B70. Both entries report an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark table is empty. Consequently, a direct performance comparison cannot be derived from measured results. The percentile ranking for both GPUs sits at 50, which places each within the middle of the database distribution, but this figure does not indicate relative performance between the two, as it is computed against all GPUs, not against each other.

Without benchmark data, the only quantitative comparisons available come from the specification sheets. The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Pro B70 delivers 22.94 TFLOPS. This represents a 3.56x advantage for the AMD part in single-precision throughput. In FP16, the AMD card maintains 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel card reaches 45.88 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, giving AMD a 1.78x lead. Texture fill rates show a similar gap: the MI308X outputs 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 716.8 GTexel/s for the B70, a 3.56x difference. Pixel throughput, however, favors the Intel part, as the B70 delivers 358.4 GPixel/s while the MI308X reports 0 MPixel/s, a direct consequence of the AMD card lacking display outputs and raster operations units.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the AMD accelerator. The MI308X provides 5.32 TB/s across an 8192-bit HBM3 interface, while the B70 offers 608.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 bus. That is an 8.75x difference. Memory capacity also diverges sharply: 192 GB on the AMD side versus 32 GB on the Intel side, a 6x gap. These figures indicate that the MI308X is engineered for memory-bound workloads, while the B70 targets a different segment with more modest memory requirements.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Pro B70 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G31 chip, also on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Both share the same process node and foundry, but the transistor counts differ dramatically. The MI308X integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4 million per mm². The B70 has an unknown transistor count on a 368 mm² die, which is roughly 36% of the AMD die area.

Compute resource allocation reflects the divergent design goals. The MI308X packs 19,456 shading units and 1,216 texture mapping units, with zero ROPs. The B70 contains 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The AMD part also reports no ray tracing cores, while the Intel part includes 32 RT cores. Neither GPU lists tensor cores in the database, though the architectures differ in how they handle mixed-precision work. The MI308X runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, indicating a compute-oriented design without dedicated tensor hardware. The B70 runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, suggesting a more traditional graphics pipeline with hardware acceleration for certain workloads.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The MI308X uses HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 192 GB capacity, operating at 1300 MHz with 5.2 Gbps effective data rate. The B70 uses GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 32 GB capacity, operating at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective data rate. The AMD card’s memory clock is lower, but the vastly wider bus delivers far greater aggregate bandwidth. Clock speeds on the compute side also differ: the MI308X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 2100 MHz, while the B70 runs at 2280 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. The Intel part runs at higher clock frequencies, but its smaller execution resource pool limits overall throughput.

Power and physical design follow the architectural split. The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W, requires a 1150 W suggested PSU, and mounts as an OAM module with no power connectors and no display outputs. The B70 has a TDP of 230 W, requires a 550 W suggested PSU, uses a dual-slot form factor with a single 8-pin power connector, and provides display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The AMD card is clearly a server accelerator, while the Intel card is a workstation-oriented GPU with video output capabilities. The MI308X has no API support listed for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the B70 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates that the AMD Instinct MI308X dominates in raw compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity. Its 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance, combined with 5.32 TB/s bandwidth and 192 GB capacity, positions it for large-scale compute workloads such as AI training, scientific simulation, and high-performance computing. The absence of display outputs and graphics API support reinforces this server-oriented role. The MI308X also leads in texture rate at 2,553.6 GTexel/s, which benefits texture-heavy compute kernels.

The Intel Arc Pro B70 wins in areas tied to graphics output and rasterization. Its 128 ROPs and 358.4 GPixel/s pixel rate enable traditional rendering tasks, and its display outputs allow direct connection to monitors. The B70 also has ray tracing hardware, which the MI308X lacks entirely. The Intel part’s higher clock speeds, 2800 MHz boost versus 2100 MHz, may benefit latency-sensitive tasks, though the smaller compute pool limits peak throughput. The B70’s support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 makes it suitable for graphics applications, whereas the MI308X has no such API support.

The B70 also wins on power efficiency from a system perspective. Its 230 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU contrast with the MI308X’s 750 W TDP and 1150 W suggested PSU. The Intel card fits into a dual-slot PCIe form factor with dimensions of 267 mm length, 110 mm height, and 39 mm width, while the AMD card is an OAM module with no listed dimensions. The B70’s 32 GB memory, while smaller, is still substantial for workstation tasks and comes with a lower system integration burden.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI308X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32, which is 3.56x the 22.94 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Pro B70.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B70 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the B70 includes 32 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI308X reports no ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The MI308X provides 5.32 TB/s of bandwidth on an 8192-bit HBM3 bus, while the B70 provides 608.0 GB/s on a 256-bit GDDR6 bus. This is an 8.75x advantage for the AMD part.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI308X output video to a display?

A: No, the MI308X has no display outputs and reports a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The Intel Arc Pro B70 has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W. The B70 has a TDP of 230 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU has more memory capacity?

A: The MI308X has 192 GB of HBM3, while the B70 has 32 GB of GDDR6. The AMD card offers 6x more capacity.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Instinct MI308X uses the CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the Intel Arc Pro B70 uses Xe2-HPG on the BMG-G31 chip. Both use a 5 nm TSMC process, but the MI308X has 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, while the B70 has an unknown transistor count on a 368 mm² die.

Clock speeds differ: the MI308X runs at 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost, while the B70 runs at 2280 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ, with the MI308X at 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective) and the B70 at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). Memory type, capacity, bus width, and bandwidth all diverge: HBM3 with 192 GB on an 8192-bit bus at 5.32 TB/s for AMD, versus GDDR6 with 32 GB on a 256-bit bus at 608.0 GB/s for Intel.

Compute resource counts show the MI308X with 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, 0 ROPs, and no RT cores. The B70 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 RT cores. Pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s for AMD and 358.4 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s for AMD and 716.8 GTexel/s for Intel. FP32 is 81.72 TFLOPS for AMD and 22.94 TFLOPS for Intel. FP16 is 81.72 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD and 45.88 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel.

Power and physical specifications differ as well. The MI308X has a TDP of 750 W, an OAM module slot width, no power connectors, and a 1150 W suggested PSU. The B70 has a TDP of 230 W, a dual-slot form factor, a single 8-pin power connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU. The MI308X has no display outputs, while the B70 offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. API support is absent for the MI308X, while the B70 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Dimensions are listed only for the B70: 267 mm length, 110 mm height, 39 mm width. Release dates are 2023-12-05 for the MI308X and 2026-03-25 for the B70. The B70 has a launch MSRP of 949 USD.