AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S vs Intel Arc B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S and the Intel Arc B370. The only recorded benchmark for either product is a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result for the Intel Arc B370, which scored 1184 points. That score places the Intel part at the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database, a very low standing. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has no benchmark entries, so its average benchmark score is recorded as 0 and its percentile is 50, which is a neutral placement rather than a measured result.

Looking at the Intel Arc B370's nearest rivals in the database, the picture is consistent. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 averages 1186 points, which is 0.2% ahead of the Arc B370. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 averages 1190 points, 0.5% ahead. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M averages 1192 points, 0.7% ahead. The AMD FirePro M2000 averages 1168 points, which is 1.4% behind the Arc B370. These deltas are all within a narrow 2.1 percentage point band, indicating that the Arc B370's measured performance lands in the same class as a set of older discrete and mobile GPUs from roughly a decade earlier.

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S, by contrast, does not have competing benchmark data in the database. What can be stated from the recorded specifications is that the AMD part is designed for a fundamentally different performance tier. Its FP32 compute is listed at 47.84 TFLOPS, its texture rate at 747.5 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate at 373.8 GPixel/s. The Intel Arc B370 lists FP32 at 6.144 TFLOPS, texture rate at 96.00 GTexel/s, and pixel rate at 48.00 GPixel/s. On paper, the AMD part is roughly 7.8 times higher in FP32 throughput, about 7.8 times higher in texture rate, and about 7.8 times higher in pixel rate. These are specification-derived ratios, not measured benchmark deltas, but they indicate a wide performance gap.

The Intel Arc B370's single benchmark score of 1184, when compared to its nearest rivals, shows it performing essentially at parity with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which sits only 0.2% higher. The closest competitor below it, the AMD FirePro M2000, is 1.4% slower. The recorded data therefore places the Arc B370 in a performance bracket that is far below what the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S targets, even though no direct comparison benchmark exists in the database.

FAQ

Q: Does the database show a direct benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S and the Intel Arc B370?

A: No. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the AMD part has no benchmark entries at all. The only recorded benchmark is for the Intel Arc B370, a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 is 0.2% ahead at 1186, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 is 0.5% ahead at 1190, the AMD Radeon HD 7650M is 0.7% ahead at 1192, and the AMD FirePro M2000 is 1.4% behind at 1168.

Q: What is the Intel Arc B370's percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database, based on its average benchmark score of 1184.

Q: What is the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S's percentile ranking?

A: The AMD part is recorded at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0, which reflects the absence of benchmark data rather than a measured performance level.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures for both GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S is listed at 47.84 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc B370 is listed at 6.144 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: What are the TDP figures for the two products?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has a TDP of 300 W, while the Intel Arc B370 has a TDP of 25 W.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, produced on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation. The chip integrates 53,900 million transistors on a die size of 357 mm², giving a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The Intel Arc B370 uses the Panther Lake chip built on Xe3-LPG architecture, produced on a 3 nm process at Intel, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

The AMD part is a discrete, dual-slot card with a 267 mm length, 109 mm height, and 39 mm width, requiring a 700 W suggested power supply and a single 16-pin power connector. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors, no slot width beyond IGP, and no recorded dimensions. Its memory configuration is system shared, with bandwidth listed as system dependent, whereas the AMD card carries 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256 bit bus with 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc B370's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Compute resources differ sharply. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, 128 ROPs, and 64 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. The AMD part's FP16 throughput is listed at 47.84 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Intel part's FP16 is 12.29 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD card has a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2350 MHz, and a boost clock of 2920 MHz, while the Intel IGP has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz with no game clock listed.

Both products support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has four DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The Intel part uses an IGP bus interface and its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The AMD card was released on 2025-12-10, while the Intel part was released on 2026-01-26. The AMD part's predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel part has no predecessor listed. Neither product has a successor listed.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split between these two products. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S is a high-end discrete workstation GPU with 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, 4096 shading units, and 47.84 TFLOPS FP32 compute. The Intel Arc B370 is a 25 W integrated GPU with system shared memory, 1280 shading units, and 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 compute. The AMD part is built for sustained, high-throughput workloads on a dedicated PCIe 5.0 x16 slot with a 16-pin power connector and a 700 W suggested power supply. The Intel part is built for low-power, portable devices where the display output and memory are system dependent.

The benchmark evidence, though limited, reinforces this. The Intel Arc B370's only recorded score, 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, places it at the 5th percentile and within 1.4% of several much older GPUs. The AMD part has no recorded benchmark, so no measured verdict can be derived from the database. However, the specification sheet alone separates the two into different categories: one is a dual-slot, 300 W discrete accelerator, the other is an IGP with no power connectors and no dedicated memory.

For users requiring a dedicated GPU with 32 GB of memory, a 256 bit bus, and 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S is the only option between the two that meets those requirements. For a low-power integrated solution that fits in portable devices and draws 25 W, the Intel Arc B370 is the only option between the two that fits that description. The database does not provide a direct performance comparison, so any claim of superiority in raw speed must be inferred from the specification differences, which strongly favor the AMD part in every compute metric recorded.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S uses the Navi 48 chip, RDNA 4.0 architecture, a 4 nm TSMC process, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation. The Intel Arc B370 uses the Panther Lake chip, Xe3-LPG architecture, a 3 nm Intel process, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation.

Memory differs completely. The AMD card has 32 GB GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). The Intel part has system shared memory, system shared type, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth.

Compute resources differ. The AMD part has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 64 RT cores. The Intel part has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 RT cores. The AMD part's pixel rate is 373.8 GPixel/s and texture rate is 747.5 GTexel/s. The Intel part's pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 is 47.84 TFLOPS for AMD and 6.144 TFLOPS for Intel. FP16 is 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD and 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel.

Clocks differ. The AMD card runs at 1660 MHz base, 2350 MHz game, and 2920 MHz boost. The Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, with no game clock listed. The AMD card has a TDP of 300 W, is dual-slot, uses one 16-pin power connector, and suggests a 700 W PSU. The Intel part has a TDP of 25 W, is an IGP, uses no power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU.

Physical and interface details differ. The AMD card is 267 mm long, 109 mm high, and 39 mm wide, uses PCIe 5.0 x16, and has four DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The Intel part has no dimensions, uses an IGP bus interface, and lists portable device dependent display outputs. The AMD card has 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die with 151.0M per mm² density. The Intel part lists unknown transistors, unknown die size, and no density. Release dates are 2025-12-10 for AMD and 2026-01-26 for Intel. The AMD predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega; the Intel predecessor is not listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S wins in every specification category that matters for high-end discrete rendering and compute. It has 32 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, a 256 bit memory bus, and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, which supports large datasets and high-resolution framebuffers. It has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 64 RT cores, which gives it substantially higher theoretical throughput for rasterization, texturing, and ray tracing. Its 47.84 TFLOPS FP32 and 47.84 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1) make it suited for compute-heavy workloads that need full-rate FP16. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and four DisplayPort 2.1a outputs support workstation-style multi-display configurations. The 300 W TDP and 16-pin power connector indicate a design for sustained load in a desktop chassis.

The Intel Arc B370 wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is dramatically lower than the AMD part's 300 W TDP. It requires no power connectors, no dedicated slot beyond IGP, and no suggested PSU, which makes it suitable for portable devices where the display outputs and memory are system dependent. Its 3 nm Intel process is a smaller node than the AMD part's 4 nm TSMC process, and its 300 MHz base clock with 2400 MHz boost shows a power-conscious clock strategy. Its FP16 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio indicates that it can double FP16 work relative to FP32, which is useful for certain shader and media workloads despite the lower absolute numbers.

The recorded benchmark data gives the Intel Arc B370 its only measured win: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, which places it at the 5th percentile and within 1.4% of its nearest rivals. The AMD part has no recorded benchmark score, so it cannot claim a measured win in the database. The specification sheet, however, shows the AMD part ahead by roughly 7.8 times in FP32, texture rate, and pixel rate, and it carries 32 GB of dedicated memory versus system shared for Intel. The choice between the two is therefore a choice between a high-end discrete accelerator and a low-power integrated GPU, with each product winning in its own category according to the recorded data.