AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S and Intel Arc B770 target different priorities, and the recorded specifications make the split clear. The AMD card wins on raw compute throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth. The Intel card wins on power efficiency, clock discipline, and certain specialized compute ratios.

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S delivers 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is more than double the Intel Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS. That gap defines the AMD card's primary advantage: heavy FP32 workloads. The AMD card also provides 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel card provides 16 GB on the same 256-bit bus width, yielding 512.0 GB/s. For datasets that exceed 16 GB, the AMD card is the only option between the two.

The Intel Arc B770 counters with a lower 225 W TDP versus the AMD card's 300 W. The Intel card also has a higher base clock of 2100 MHz compared to the AMD card's 1660 MHz, although the AMD card boosts higher at 2920 MHz versus 2400 MHz. The Intel card's FP16 rate of 39.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio means it processes half-precision at nearly double its FP32 rate, while the AMD card runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, matching its 47.84 TFLOPS FP32 figure. In FP16-heavy workloads, the Intel card's specialized ratio may prove more efficient per watt, despite the AMD card's higher absolute FP16 number.

The Intel card also uses a smaller process node at 5 nm versus the AMD card's 4 nm, but both are fabricated by TSMC. The Intel card requires only a 550 W suggested PSU, while the AMD card asks for 700 W. The Intel card uses a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connector setup, while the AMD card uses a single 16-pin connector.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation. The Intel Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip built on Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation. These are fundamentally different designs with different priorities.

The AMD chip is fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process and contains 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The Intel chip is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, with a die size of 368 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database. The Intel die is slightly larger at 368 mm² versus 357 mm², yet the AMD die packs far more transistors into a smaller area.

Both cards have 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The AMD card has 64 ray tracing cores, while the Intel card has 32. That is a 2x difference in RT core count. The AMD card's pixel rate is 373.8 GPixel/s versus the Intel card's 307.2 GPixel/s. The AMD card's texture rate is 747.5 GTexel/s versus the Intel card's 614.4 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture differs in capacity and speed. The AMD card runs GDDR6 at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), producing 644.6 GB/s. The Intel card runs GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), producing 512.0 GB/s. Both use a 256-bit bus, so the bandwidth difference comes entirely from the faster memory clocks on the AMD card.

The AMD card uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The AMD card has four DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The Intel card has one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card is a dual-slot design measuring 267 mm in length, 109 mm in height, and 39 mm in width. The Intel card is also dual-slot, but its dimensions are not recorded in the database.

The AMD card's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel card's predecessor is Alchemist. The AMD card's production status is listed as Active, while the Intel card's production status is not recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two cards, and neither card has individual benchmark scores or nearest rival data. The analysis below relies entirely on the recorded specification fields.

The single largest gap is FP32 compute. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S delivers 47.84 TFLOPS, which is 28.18 TFLOPS higher than the Intel Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS. That is a 143% advantage. Any workload that scales with FP32 throughput will strongly favor the AMD card.

Memory bandwidth shows a similar but smaller gap. The AMD card's 644.6 GB/s is 132.6 GB/s higher than the Intel card's 512.0 GB/s, a 26% advantage. Combined with double the capacity (32 GB versus 16 GB), the AMD card has a decisive memory advantage for large working sets.

Pixel throughput favors the AMD card by 66.6 GPixel/s (373.8 versus 307.2), a 22% advantage. Texture throughput favors the AMD card by 133.1 GTexel/s (747.5 versus 614.4), also a 22% advantage. These ratios align with the identical 4096 shading unit and 256 TMU counts, meaning the AMD card's higher clocks drive the throughput differences.

The Intel card wins on clock behavior. Its base clock of 2100 MHz is 440 MHz higher than the AMD card's 1660 MHz base. However, the AMD card's boost clock of 2920 MHz is 520 MHz higher than the Intel card's 2400 MHz boost. The Intel card also has a game clock listed as null, while the AMD card has a 2350 MHz game clock. The Intel card's narrower clock range (2100 to 2400 MHz) suggests more consistent sustained clocks, while the AMD card's wider range (1660 to 2920 MHz) suggests larger dynamic swings.

In FP16 compute, the Intel card's 2:1 ratio produces 39.32 TFLOPS, which is nearly double its own FP32 rate. The AMD card's 1:1 ratio produces 47.84 TFLOPS FP16, which is identical to its FP32 rate. The AMD card still has a higher absolute FP16 number by 8.52 TFLOPS, but the Intel card achieves its FP16 rate at a lower 225 W TDP. The Intel card's FP16 per watt is 39.32 divided by 225, while the AMD card's FP16 per watt is 47.84 divided by 300. The Intel card delivers more FP16 throughput per watt according to the recorded data.

Power draw favors the Intel card. The Intel Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP versus the AMD card's 300 W, a 75 W difference. The suggested PSU also reflects this: 550 W for Intel versus 700 W for AMD. The Intel card uses a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connector configuration, while the AMD card uses a single 16-pin connector, which typically requires a newer power supply.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear split by workload type. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S is the choice for FP32-heavy compute, large memory footprints, and maximum throughput. Its 47.84 TFLOPS FP32, 32 GB memory, and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for workloads that need both raw compute and large datasets. Its 64 ray tracing cores also double the Intel card's 32, which may matter for RT workloads, though no benchmark data confirms this.

The Intel Arc B770 is the choice for power-constrained environments and FP16-specialized workloads. Its 225 W TDP is 75 W lower than the AMD card's 300 W, and its suggested PSU of 550 W is 150 W lower. The Intel card's FP16 rate of 39.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio shows a deliberate design for half-precision efficiency, even though its absolute FP16 number trails the AMD card's 47.84 TFLOPS.

For memory-bound applications that fit within 16 GB, the Intel card's 512.0 GB/s bandwidth may suffice, but the AMD card's 644.6 GB/s provides a 26% advantage. For applications that need more than 16 GB, the Intel card cannot participate at all. The AMD card's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface also offers double the link bandwidth of the Intel card's PCIe 4.0 x16, which may matter for data transfer to and from the host system.

Neither card has recorded benchmark scores in the database, and both share the same 50th percentile ranking against all GPUs. The analysis must therefore rest on the specification data alone. The AMD card is the higher-performance part in absolute terms across every throughput metric. The Intel card is the lower-power part with a more efficient FP16 path and a simpler power connector requirement.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more FP32 compute power?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S delivers 47.84 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS. The AMD card has a 28.18 TFLOPS advantage.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 32 GB of GDDR6, and the Intel Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6. Both use a 256-bit memory bus.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 644.6 GB/s, compared to the Intel Arc B770's 512.0 GB/s. The AMD card's memory runs at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), while the Intel card's runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP, while the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has a 300 W TDP. The Intel card also has a lower suggested PSU of 550 W versus 700 W for the AMD card.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 64 ray tracing cores, and the Intel Arc B770 has 32 ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the process nodes for these cards?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S uses TSMC's 4 nm process, and the Intel Arc B770 uses TSMC's 5 nm process.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S | Intel Arc B770 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Navi 48 | BMG-G31 |

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Xe2-HPG |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) | Battlemage (Arc 7) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 53,900 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 357 mm² | 368 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1660 MHz | 2100 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2920 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2350 MHz | null |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Clock | 2518 MHz 20.1 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 644.6 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| RT Cores | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 373.8 GPixel/s | 307.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 747.5 GTexel/s | 614.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 47.84 TFLOPS | 19.66 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1) | 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 225 W |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 550 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1a | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Length | 267 mm 10.5 inches | null |

| Height | 109 mm 4.3 inches | null |

| Width | 39 mm 1.5 inches | null |

| Release Date | 2025-12-10 | 2025-12-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Alchemist |