AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data for the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 and the Intel Arc B770 shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results, and neither product has a compiled average benchmark score or percentile ranking above the baseline. The wins in this comparison are therefore defined by architectural purpose and measured specifications rather than by benchmark deltas.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is positioned as a data center compute accelerator. Its design priorities are reflected in the absence of display outputs, a zero pixel rate, and a memory subsystem built around 128 GB of HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus. The FP16 throughput of 383.0 TFLOPS (8:1 ratio) is an order of magnitude higher than the Intel part’s FP16 figure, and the FP32 rate of 47.87 TFLOPS more than doubles the Arc B770’s 19.66 TFLOPS. The MI300 wins on raw compute throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and transistor count.

The Intel Arc B770 wins on every metric related to graphics output and consumer-facing features. It has 128 ROPs and a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s, while the MI300 has zero ROPs and zero pixel rate. The Arc B770 includes 32 ray tracing cores, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and provides display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The MI300 lists no graphics API support and no display outputs. The Arc B770 also wins on clock speed: 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost versus the MI300’s 1000 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost.

The use-case split is stark. The MI300 is for compute-heavy data center workloads where memory bandwidth and FP16/FP32 throughput dominate. The Arc B770 is for rasterization, ray tracing, and display-driven workloads on a desktop platform.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural families. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 uses CDNA 3.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process. The Intel Arc B770 uses Xe2-HPG architecture, also on TSMC’s 5 nm process, but from the Battlemage generation (Arc 7).

The MI300’s chip, codenamed Aqua Vanjaram, integrates 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Arc B770’s chip, BMG-G31, has a die size of 368 mm² and its transistor count is listed as unknown. The MI300’s die is roughly 2.76 times larger in area, and its transistor density is significantly higher than the recorded value for the AMD part.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The MI300 uses 128 GB of HBM3 with an 8192-bit bus and 6.55 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc B770 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI300’s bus width is 32 times wider, and its memory bandwidth is 12.8 times higher.

Compute resource allocation also diverges. The MI300 has 14080 shading units, 880 texture mapping units, and 0 ROPs. The Arc B770 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The MI300 has no dedicated ray tracing cores; the Arc B770 has 32. The MI300 does not list tensor cores, and neither does the Arc B770.

Power and connectivity differ as well. The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W, requires a 1000 W suggested PSU, and uses 2x 8-pin power connectors. The Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W, a 550 W suggested PSU, and uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. The MI300 uses PCIe 5.0 x16; the Arc B770 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI300 has no display outputs and no dimensions for slot width; the Arc B770 is dual-slot and provides a full set of modern display outputs.

Release dates also separate them. The MI300 was released on January 3, 2023, and its predecessor is FirePro Data Center. The Arc B770 has a release date of December 31, 2025, and its predecessor is Alchemist.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results for these two products, and neither has an average benchmark score above zero. The wins are therefore derived from specification-level comparisons, which are recorded in the database.

The largest single specification win for the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is memory bandwidth. At 6.55 TB/s, it delivers 12.8 times the bandwidth of the Intel Arc B770’s 512.0 GB/s. Memory capacity follows: 128 GB versus 16 GB, an eightfold difference. FP16 throughput shows the MI300 at 383.0 TFLOPS, which is 9.74 times the Arc B770’s 39.32 TFLOPS. FP32 throughput is 47.87 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS, a 2.43 times advantage. Texture rate is 1,496.0 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s, a 2.44 times advantage. The MI300’s shading unit count is 14080 versus 4096, a 3.44 times difference. TMU count is 880 versus 256, a 3.44 times difference.

The Intel Arc B770 wins on pixel rate by a maximum margin, since the MI300 records 0 MPixel/s. The Arc B770’s 307.2 GPixel/s is a functional capability the MI300 does not possess. Boost clock advantage is 2400 MHz versus 1700 MHz, a 700 MHz difference. Base clock advantage is 2100 MHz versus 1000 MHz, a 1100 MHz difference. The Arc B770 also has 128 ROPs versus 0, and 32 ray tracing cores versus none listed.

The MI300’s transistor count of 153,000 million is recorded against the Arc B770’s unknown transistor count, so a direct numeric comparison is not possible. Similarly, the MI300’s die size of 1017 mm² is recorded against the Arc B770’s 368 mm², giving a 649 mm² difference in favor of AMD in absolute area, though this is a physical attribute rather than a performance metric.

Power consumption shows the MI300 at 600 W TDP versus the Arc B770’s 225 W TDP, a 375 W difference. The suggested PSU for the MI300 is 1000 W versus 550 W for the Arc B770.

The Verdict

The data indicates two products with almost no overlap in intended use. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 is a data center accelerator with no display outputs, no rasterization hardware, and a memory subsystem scaled for massive datasets. Its FP32 and FP16 throughput, memory bandwidth, and capacity are multiples of the Intel part, but it cannot render a frame to a screen. The Intel Arc B770 is a desktop graphics card with ray tracing cores, a full graphics pipeline, and modern display outputs, but its compute throughput and memory bandwidth are far below the MI300.

For workloads involving FP32 or FP16 computation, large memory resident datasets, or high-bandwidth memory access, the MI300 is the only viable choice based on the recorded specifications. Its 6.55 TB/s bandwidth and 128 GB capacity are unmatched by the Arc B770’s 512.0 GB/s and 16 GB.

For any workload involving rasterization, pixel output, ray tracing, or display connectivity, the Arc B770 is the only option. The MI300 records zero pixel rate, zero ROPs, and no display outputs. The Arc B770’s 128 ROPs, 32 ray tracing cores, and 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate are functional capabilities the MI300 does not offer.

The process node is identical: both use TSMC 5 nm. The architectural direction diverges from there. The MI300 allocates its silicon to compute units and memory controllers; the Arc B770 allocates its smaller die to graphics fixed-function hardware.

The power envelope reinforces the split. The MI300 requires a 600 W TDP and a 1000 W PSU, consistent with a compute accelerator. The Arc B770 uses 225 W and a 550 W PSU, consistent with a consumer graphics card.

Neither product has a recorded average benchmark score above zero, and neither has a percentile ranking above 50. The database’s head-to-head benchmark list is empty. The verdict must therefore rest on the specification-level advantages, which are unambiguous in their respective domains.

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 records 47.87 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc B770 records 19.66 TFLOPS. The MI300 is 2.43 times higher.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B770 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc B770 has 32 ray tracing cores. The MI300 does not list any ray tracing cores.

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

A: The MI300 has 6.55 TB/s of bandwidth from 128 GB HBM3 on an 8192-bit bus. The Arc B770 has 512.0 GB/s from 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The MI300 delivers 12.8 times the bandwidth.

Q: Can the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300 output video to a display?

A: No. The MI300 lists “No outputs” for display outputs and has a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. The Arc B770 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1.

Q: Which product uses more power?

A: The MI300 has a TDP of 600 W and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: What process node do both chips use?

A: Both the MI300 and the Arc B770 are fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process node.

Q: Which product has more texture mapping units?

A: The MI300 has 880 TMUs, while the Arc B770 has 256 TMUs. The MI300 has 3.44 times the TMU count.