AMD Instinct MI350X vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Instinct MI350X and the Intel Arc B770 shows no direct benchmark comparisons, as the head-to-head benchmark set is empty. Both products also carry an average benchmark score of zero, meaning the database contains no measured performance results for either unit at this time. The percentileVsAllGpus field lists both at the 50th percentile, which is the median position within the database, but this value is not supported by any actual benchmark entries.

Because no benchmark scores exist, the analysis must rely on the technical specifications and architectural parameters recorded in the database. The AMD Instinct MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS. This represents a 3.67x difference in raw single-precision floating-point throughput. In FP16, the MI350X maintains 72.09 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the B770 reaches 39.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The MI350X leads by a factor of 1.83 in FP16 work.

Memory bandwidth shows a similar pattern. The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit bus, achieving 8.19 TB/s. The B770 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus, achieving 512.0 GB/s. The MI350X has 16 times the memory capacity and 16 times the bandwidth. Texture fill rates also favor the MI350X: 2,252.8 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s, a 3.67x difference. The B770 records a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s, while the MI350X records 0 MPixel/s, indicating the MI350X does not perform traditional rasterized pixel output.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The B770 runs at a base clock of 2100 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The MI350X runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The B770's base clock is 2.1 times higher, and its boost clock is 1.09 times higher. This reflects the different design goals: the MI350X uses a massive 2380 mm² die with 185,000 million transistors on a 3 nm TSMC process, while the B770 uses a 368 mm² die on a 5 nm TSMC process. Transistor density for the MI350X is 77.7M per mm², while the B770's density is not recorded.

Power consumption diverges sharply. The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W, with no power connectors because it is an OAM module. The B770 has a TDP of 225 W, a suggested PSU of 550 W, and uses one 6-pin plus one 8-pin power connector. The MI350X consumes 4.44 times the power of the B770. The B770 is a dual-slot card with PCIe 4.0 x16, while the MI350X uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Instinct MI350X wins in every compute-oriented metric recorded in the database. FP32 throughput is 72.09 TFLOPS, which is 3.67 times the B770's 19.66 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput is 72.09 TFLOPS at 1:1, which is 1.83 times the B770's 39.32 TFLOPS at 2:1. The MI350X also leads in texture rate, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and transistor count. It uses 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, and has a die size of 2380 mm². The MI350X targets high-throughput compute workloads where massive memory capacity and bandwidth matter more than clock speed.

The Intel Arc B770 wins in areas that support client-side graphics and display output. It has 128 ROPs and a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s, while the MI350X has 0 ROPs and 0 MPixel/s. The B770 includes 32 ray tracing cores, while the MI350X has no recorded ray tracing core count. The B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI350X lists N/A for all three APIs, meaning it does not expose those graphics APIs. The B770 also has display outputs: one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 connections. The MI350X has no display outputs.

Clock speed is another area where the B770 wins. A base clock of 2100 MHz and boost clock of 2400 MHz exceed the MI350X's 1000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost. Higher clocks benefit latency-sensitive workloads that cannot saturate the massive parallel throughput of the MI350X. The B770 also wins on power efficiency at the card level: 225 W TDP versus 1000 W TDP. The B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS at 225 W, which is 87.4 GFLOPS per watt. The MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS at 1000 W, which is 72.09 GFLOPS per watt. The B770 has a higher compute-per-watt ratio in FP32.

The B770 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is backward compatible with most systems, while the MI350X uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The B770's GDDR6 memory operates at 16 Gbps effective, while the MI350X's HBM3e operates at 8 Gbps effective. The B770's memory clock is 2 times higher in effective data rate, but the MI350X's 8192-bit bus width compensates with far greater total bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Instinct MI350X uses the CDNA 4.0 architecture with the MI350 256CU chip. It is built on a 3 nm TSMC process and has 185,000 million transistors on a 2380 mm² die. The transistor density is 77.7M per mm². The architecture is designed for compute acceleration in the Instinct (MIx) generation. The predecessor is listed as Radeon Instinct. The MI350X has 16,384 shading units and 1,024 TMUs. It has no ROPs, no ray tracing cores, and no recorded tensor cores. The FP16 ratio is 1:1, meaning it does not double FP16 throughput relative to FP32.

The Intel Arc B770 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture with the BMG-G31 chip. It is built on a 5 nm TSMC process. The transistor count is recorded as unknown, and the die size is 368 mm². The architecture is part of the Battlemage generation in the Arc 7 product line. The predecessor is listed as Alchemist. The B770 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. The FP16 ratio is 2:1, meaning it doubles FP16 throughput relative to FP32. This is a key architectural difference: the MI350X provides equal FP16 and FP32 throughput, while the B770 trades FP32 throughput for FP16 throughput.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The MI350X uses 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2000 MHz at 8 Gbps effective. The B770 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2000 MHz at 16 Gbps effective. Both use a 2000 MHz memory clock, but the effective data rates differ because of the memory type. The MI350X's HBM3e uses a wider bus to achieve bandwidth, while the B770's GDDR6 uses a higher effective data rate on a narrower bus.

The MI350X is an OAM module with no power connectors and no display outputs. Its dimensions are 102 mm in length and 165 mm in width. The B770 is a dual-slot card with one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and display outputs including one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1. The B770's dimensions are not recorded in the database.

The MI350X supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the B770 supports PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The B770 has a TDP of 225 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The MI350X has no recorded API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The release dates differ. The MI350X was released on 2025-06-11, while the B770 is dated 2025-12-31. Neither product has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X delivers 72.09 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS. The MI350X is 3.67 times faster in FP32.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus. The Intel Arc B770 has 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The MI350X has 16 times the bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B770 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the B770 has 32 ray tracing cores. The AMD Instinct MI350X has no recorded ray tracing core count and no ROPs, and its API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Instinct MI350X has a TDP of 1000 W and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. It is an OAM module with no power connectors. The Intel Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The Intel Arc B770 has a base clock of 2100 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The AMD Instinct MI350X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The B770 has a 2.1 times higher base clock and a 1.09 times higher boost clock.

Q: Which GPU supports display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc B770 supports one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The AMD Instinct MI350X has no display outputs.

The Verdict

The data shows two products with opposite design targets. The AMD Instinct MI350X is a compute accelerator with 72.09 TFLOPS FP32, 288 GB of HBM3e, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, and a 1000 W TDP. It has no display outputs, no ROPs, and no graphics API support. It is built for workloads that require massive memory capacity and bandwidth, such as large-scale compute tasks that fit within the CDNA 4.0 architecture. The MI350X uses a 2380 mm² die with 185,000 million transistors on a 3 nm TSMC process. Its release date of 2025-06-11 places it earlier in the database timeline.

The Intel Arc B770 is a client graphics card with 19.66 TFLOPS FP32, 16 GB of GDDR6, 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, and a 225 W TDP. It has 128 ROPs, 32 ray tracing cores, and full graphics API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It provides display outputs with one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1. The B770 uses a 368 mm² die on a 5 nm TSMC process and has a 2:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it doubles FP16 throughput relative to FP32. Its release date of 2025-12-31 is later in the database.

For FP32 compute per watt, the B770 records 87.4 GFLOPS per watt versus 72.09 GFLOPS per watt for the MI350X. For FP16 compute per watt, the B770 records 174.8 GFLOPS per watt versus 72.09 GFLOPS per watt for the MI350X. The B770 is more efficient in both metrics when measured against TDP.

For workloads that need pixel output, ray tracing, graphics APIs, or display connectivity, the Intel Arc B770 is the only option with those capabilities. The MI350X cannot perform those functions because it has no ROPs, no ray tracing cores, no API support, and no display outputs.

For workloads that need maximum memory capacity, maximum bandwidth, or maximum FP32 throughput, the AMD Instinct MI350X is the stronger choice. It provides 16 times the memory capacity, 16 times the bandwidth, and 3.67 times the FP32 throughput of the B770. The MI350X also has 16,384 shading units versus 4,096, and 1,024 TMUs versus 256. The MI350X's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the link generation of the B770's PCIe 4.0 x16.

The database contains no benchmark scores for either product, so the verdict rests on specifications. The MI350X is suited to compute environments where power is available and display output is unnecessary. The B770 is suited to client systems where graphics output, ray tracing, and standard APIs are required. Neither product fills the other's role. The choice depends entirely on the workload class: compute acceleration points to the MI350X, graphics rendering points to the B770.