AMD Instinct MI350P vs Intel Arc Pro B50 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI350P against the Intel Arc Pro B50. The MI350P has no benchmark scores listed, while the Arc Pro B50 has a full suite of eight recorded results. This absence of comparative data means the analysis must rely on the architectural specifications and the B50's standalone performance profile.

The Arc Pro B50's strongest recorded result is in the Passmark G3D test, where it scores 12,553 points. Its GPU compute score of 6,037 indicates a moderate compute workload capability. In the DirectX 11 Passmark test, the B50 scores 100, which is the highest of its DirectX results, followed by DirectX 9 at 144, DirectX 10 at 58, and DirectX 12 at 64. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows a score of 1,604, and the G2D test records 717 points.

The B50's average benchmark score is 2,660, placing it at the 17th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 with an average score of 2,662, a delta of -0.1% relative to the B50. The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M scores 2,664, a delta of -0.2%. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 scores 2,645, a delta of 0.6%, meaning the B50 is 0.6% ahead of it. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER scores 2,690, a delta of -1.1%, indicating the B50 trails it by 1.1%. These deltas are all within a narrow 1.7 percentage point range, suggesting the B50 performs in a tight cluster with these rivals despite their very different market positions.

The MI350P, by contrast, has zero recorded benchmarks, an average benchmark score of 0, and a percentile rank of 50. This percentile value indicates a theoretical midpoint placement, but without actual scores, no comparative performance statements can be made against the B50 or any other GPU.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI350P uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The chip, designated MI350 128CU, contains 73,000 million transistors on a die size of 1,190 mm², yielding a transistor density of 61.3 million per mm². The Intel Arc Pro B50 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage Pro Series, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its BMG-G21 chip contains 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, with a higher transistor density of 72.1 million per mm².

The MI350P has 8,192 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, and 0 raster output units. It reports a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,126.4 GTexel/s. Its FP32 compute is 36.04 TFLOPS, and its FP16 compute is also 36.04 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The B50 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 41.60 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 332.8 GTexel/s. Its FP32 compute is 10.65 TFLOPS, while FP16 reaches 21.30 TFLOPS, a 2:1 ratio.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The MI350P carries 144 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The B50 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Clock speeds also diverge: the MI350P runs at a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz, with memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The B50 has a base of 1700 MHz and a boost of 2600 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The MI350P has no display outputs and reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs, reflecting its compute-oriented design. The B50 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power requirements are starkly different: the MI350P draws 600 W TDP with a 1x 16-pin power connector and a suggested 1000 W PSU, while the B50 has a 70 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested 250 W PSU. Both cards are dual-slot, but the MI350P measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, while the B50 is 167 mm long, 69 mm high, and 40 mm wide. The MI350P uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the B50 uses PCIe 5.0 x8.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350P delivers 36.04 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than three times the 10.65 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Pro B50.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The MI350P has 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from its 144 GB HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus. The B50 has 224.0 GB/s from 16 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The MI350P's bandwidth is approximately 36.6 times higher.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B50 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the B50 includes 16 ray tracing cores. The MI350P lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Q: Can the AMD Instinct MI350P output video to a display?

A: No, the MI350P has no display outputs and lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan APIs. The B50 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and full graphics API support.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The MI350P has a TDP of 600 W and requires a suggested 1000 W PSU. The B50 has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested 250 W PSU.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 boosts to 2600 MHz, while the AMD Instinct MI350P boosts to 2200 MHz.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two GPUs built for entirely different purposes. The AMD Instinct MI350P is a compute accelerator with massive memory capacity, enormous bandwidth, and high FP32 throughput, but it lacks any display output or graphics API support. Its 600 W TDP and 1,190 mm² die size indicate a data center or server-class product. The Intel Arc Pro B50 is a workstation-oriented graphics card with display outputs, ray tracing cores, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, all within a 70 W envelope.

For compute-heavy workloads that require large memory pools and extreme bandwidth, the MI350P's 144 GB HBM3e and 8.19 TB/s are unmatched in this comparison. Its FP32 performance of 36.04 TFLOPS is 3.4 times higher than the B50's 10.65 TFLOPS. However, the MI350P cannot render graphics to a screen, and its API support is listed as N/A.

The B50, with its 16 ray tracing cores and four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, handles graphics workloads directly. Its benchmark scores place it at the 17th percentile, with an average score of 2,660, essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 and GT 440. The B50's DirectX 9 score of 144 is its best legacy API result, while its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,604 reflects modern workload performance.

Users requiring a GPU for graphical output, ray tracing, or standard workstation applications should choose the B50. Users needing raw compute throughput, massive memory capacity, or extremely high bandwidth for non-graphics workloads should select the MI350P. The two products do not compete in the same market segment, and the database reflects that separation.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The MI350P uses a 3 nm process and CDNA 4.0 architecture, while the B50 uses a 5 nm process and Xe2-HPG architecture. The MI350P has 73,000 million transistors on a 1,190 mm² die, versus 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die for the B50. Transistor density is higher on the B50 at 72.1M per mm², compared to 61.3M per mm² for the MI350P.

Shading units: 8,192 for the MI350P, 2,048 for the B50. TMUs: 512 versus 128. ROPs: 0 versus 16. Ray tracing cores: none listed for the MI350P, 16 for the B50. Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 41.60 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 1,126.4 GTexel/s versus 332.8 GTexel/s. FP32: 36.04 TFLOPS versus 10.65 TFLOPS. FP16: 36.04 TFLOPS versus 21.30 TFLOPS.

Memory size: 144 GB versus 16 GB. Memory type: HBM3e versus GDDR6. Bus width: 8,192 bit versus 128 bit. Bandwidth: 8.19 TB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. Base clock: 1000 MHz versus 1700 MHz. Boost clock: 2200 MHz versus 2600 MHz. Memory clock: 2000 MHz versus 1750 MHz.

TDP: 600 W versus 70 W. Power connectors: 1x 16-pin versus none. Suggested PSU: 1000 W versus 250 W. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs: none versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. DirectX: N/A versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). OpenGL: N/A versus 4.6. Vulkan: N/A versus 1.4. Length: 267 mm versus 167 mm. Height: 111 mm versus 69 mm. Width: 40 mm for both.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350P wins in raw compute throughput, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. Its 36.04 TFLOPS FP32 performance is 3.4 times higher than the B50's 10.65 TFLOPS. Its 144 GB of HBM3e memory is nine times larger than the B50's 16 GB, and its 8.19 TB/s bandwidth is over 36 times higher. The MI350P also has more shading units, more TMUs, and a higher texture rate. Its 3 nm process and larger die allow for higher transistor counts, though at the cost of much higher power draw.

The Intel Arc Pro B50 wins in graphics output and API compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI350P lists N/A for all three. The B50 has 16 ROPs and 16 ray tracing cores, enabling actual rasterization and ray-traced rendering, whereas the MI350P has 0 ROPs and no ray tracing cores. The B50's pixel rate of 41.60 GPixel/s is functional, while the MI350P's is 0 MPixel/s. The B50 also has higher base and boost clocks, at 1700 MHz and 2600 MHz respectively, compared to 1000 MHz and 2200 MHz for the MI350P.

The B50 is more power-efficient in terms of TDP, drawing 70 W versus 600 W, and it requires no external power connectors, while the MI350P needs a 1x 16-pin connector and a 1000 W PSU. The B50's smaller physical footprint, at 167 mm length versus 267 mm, makes it easier to fit in compact systems. Its four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs allow multi-monitor setups, which the MI350P cannot support.

In benchmark terms, only the B50 has recorded scores. Its average of 2,660 places it at the 17th percentile, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 at a -0.1% delta. The MI350P has no scores, so no direct performance comparison is possible from the database. The B50's best relative performance is in the Passmark G3D test at 12,553, and its GPU compute score of 6,037 indicates moderate compute capability, though far below the MI350P's theoretical FP32 output.