AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X vs Intel Arc Pro B370 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents a stark contrast between two accelerators designed for entirely different deployment scenarios. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X is a data center compute accelerator with no display outputs, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 is an integrated graphics processor for portable devices. The benchmark database shows no head-to-head benchmark entries for this pairing, and the win counts stand at zero for both sides. This absence of direct comparison data does not indicate parity; rather, it reflects the fundamental divergence in their intended roles.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X wins in every category that matters for large-scale compute workloads. Its shading unit count of 19,456 dwarfs the Intel Arc Pro B370's 1,280 shading units. The texture mapping units tell a similar story: 1,216 TMUs on the AMD part versus 40 on the Intel part. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Arc Pro B370 manages 6.144 TFLOPS. In FP16, the gap widens dramatically: 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1) for the AMD accelerator versus 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Intel part. These are not incremental differences; they represent orders of magnitude in raw throughput.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in the categories that define efficiency and integration. Its thermal design power of 25 W contrasts with the MI300X's 750 W. The Intel part operates as an IGP with system shared memory, eliminating the need for dedicated memory modules. The Arc Pro B370 includes 10 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the MI300X's specification sheet. Its pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s, while modest, is infinitely higher than the MI300X's 0 MPixel/s, which reflects the AMD part's complete lack of display rasterization hardware.

The MI300X uses a 5 nm process from TSMC with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The Arc Pro B370 uses Intel's 3 nm process, though transistor count and die size are listed as unknown. The AMD chip, codenamed Aqua Vanjaram, implements the CDNA 3.0 architecture. The Intel chip, codenamed Panther Lake, uses the Xe3-LPG architecture.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products should never be cross-shopped. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X targets server racks and compute clusters, where its 192 GB of HBM3 memory with 10.3 TB/s bandwidth and 8192-bit bus width enable massive model training and inference workloads. The Intel Arc Pro B370 targets thin-and-light portable devices, where its integrated design and 25 W power envelope fit within battery-constrained form factors.

For organizations deploying AI training clusters, the MI300X is the only viable choice from this pairing. Its FP16 throughput of 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1) provides the computational headroom required for large language model training. The 192 GB memory capacity exceeds what most GPU servers can attach, and the 10.3 TB/s memory bandwidth ensures data movement does not bottleneck compute. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface allows the accelerator to communicate with host processors at high speed.

For manufacturers building portable devices, the Arc Pro B370 serves as an integrated solution requiring no separate memory purchase. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API support enables modern graphics workloads. The 10 ray tracing cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature the MI300X lacks entirely. The 25 W TDP allows passive cooling solutions in thin chassis.

The percentile rankings place both at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, but this metric carries little meaning when the benchmark pool contains no common entries. The average benchmark score for both is 0, reinforcing that the database has no recorded measurements for either product.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counters for both products are zero. This means the database contains no direct comparison results between the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X and the Intel Arc Pro B370. The absence of data is itself informative: no benchmark suite designed for data center accelerators would include an integrated graphics processor, and no portable device benchmark would include a 750 W OAM module.

The largest wins for the MI300X come from its compute specifications. The FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS exceeds the Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS by a factor of 13.3. The FP16 ratio is even more lopsided: 653.7 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS, a 53.2-fold advantage. The texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s represents a 26.6-fold difference. These ratios derive directly from the specification sheet, not from any benchmark run.

The largest wins for the Arc Pro B370 come from its feature set and efficiency metrics. The 25 W TDP versus 750 W represents a 30-fold reduction in power draw. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s, while low in absolute terms, exceeds the MI300X's 0 MPixel/s because the AMD part has no rasterization hardware. The 10 ray tracing cores give the Intel part capabilities that the MI300X does not offer in any form.

The memory architectures illustrate the intended use cases. The MI300X carries 192 GB of HBM3 with a 10.3 TB/s bandwidth and 8192-bit bus width, clocked at 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective data rate. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The MI300X requires an external power supply rated at 1150 W; the Arc Pro B370 has no suggested PSU because it draws power from the host system.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 provides 6.144 TFLOPS. The MI300X's FP32 output exceeds the Arc Pro B370's by more than 13 times.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B370 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc Pro B370 includes 10 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X specification sheet lists no ray tracing cores, indicating it lacks this feature entirely.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X uses 192 GB of HBM3 memory with an 8192-bit bus width and 10.3 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning it has no dedicated memory of its own.

Q: Which GPU has a higher thermal design power?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X has a TDP of 750 W, requiring a suggested power supply of 1150 W. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W, which is 30 times lower, and lists no suggested power supply because it operates as an integrated processor.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X uses TSMC's 5 nm process and contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses Intel's 3 nm process, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown in the database.

Q: Which GPU has display outputs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its integration into portable systems. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X has no display outputs, confirming its role as a compute-only accelerator.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X implements the CDNA 3.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Aqua Vanjaram. This architecture prioritizes compute throughput over graphics features, which explains the absence of ray tracing cores and the 0 MPixel/s pixel rate. The CDNA lineage descends from FirePro Data Center products, positioning this accelerator for scientific computing and AI workloads. The 5 nm process from TSMC packs 153,000 million transistors into a 1017 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 150.4 million transistors per square millimeter.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 implements the Xe3-LPG architecture on a chip codenamed Panther Lake. This architecture belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM generation, with "WM" indicating workstation mobile integration. The Xe3-LPG design includes 10 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 3 nm process from Intel represents a newer node than the MI300X's 5 nm TSMC process, though the database does not record the Intel chip's transistor count or die size. The Arc Pro B370's predecessor is HD Graphics-WM, showing a lineage from integrated graphics rather than data center accelerators.

The API support differences reflect their divergent purposes. The MI300X lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan versions, consistent with a compute-only accelerator that does not render graphics. The Arc Pro B370 supports the latest graphics APIs, including the 12 Ultimate feature level for DirectX and Vulkan 1.4. These API differences directly affect software compatibility: applications requiring graphics APIs must use the Intel part, while compute frameworks targeting CDNA hardware must use the AMD part.

The bus interfaces also differ fundamentally. The MI300X connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, a standard high-bandwidth slot interface. The Arc Pro B370 uses an IGP interface, meaning it is integrated into the host processor package rather than installed as a discrete component. This integration affects upgradeability, cooling requirements, and system design.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X and Intel Arc Pro B370 differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Process node: The MI300X uses a 5 nm process from TSMC. The Arc Pro B370 uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Transistors: The MI300X contains 153,000 million transistors. The Arc Pro B370's transistor count is unknown.

Die size: The MI300X measures 1017 mm². The Arc Pro B370's die size is unknown.

Transistor density: The MI300X achieves 150.4 million transistors per mm². The Arc Pro B370 has no recorded transistor density.

Base clock: The MI300X runs at 1000 MHz. The Arc Pro B370 runs at 300 MHz.

Boost clock: The MI300X boosts to 2100 MHz. The Arc Pro B370 boosts to 2400 MHz.

Memory clock: The MI300X memory runs at 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory.

Memory size: The MI300X has 192 GB of HBM3. The Arc Pro B370 has system shared memory.

Memory type: The MI300X uses HBM3. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory.

Memory bus width: The MI300X has an 8192-bit bus. The Arc Pro B370 has a system shared bus.

Memory bandwidth: The MI300X provides 10.3 TB/s. The Arc Pro B370 provides system dependent bandwidth.

Shading units: The MI300X has 19,456. The Arc Pro B370 has 1,280.

Texture mapping units: The MI300X has 1,216. The Arc Pro B370 has 40.

Render output units: The MI300X has 0. The Arc Pro B370 has 20.

Ray tracing cores: The MI300X has none. The Arc Pro B370 has 10.

Pixel rate: The MI300X outputs 0 MPixel/s. The Arc Pro B370 outputs 48.00 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: The MI300X achieves 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The Arc Pro B370 achieves 96.00 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance: The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS. The Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS.

FP16 performance: The MI300X delivers 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1). The Arc Pro B370 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1).

Thermal design power: The MI300X draws 750 W. The Arc Pro B370 draws 25 W.

Slot width: The MI300X is an OAM Module. The Arc Pro B370 is an IGP.

Power connectors: Both list "None," though the MI300X requires an external 1150 W power supply suggestion.

Bus interface: The MI300X uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The Arc Pro B370 uses IGP.

Display outputs: The MI300X has no outputs. The Arc Pro B370 outputs are portable device dependent.

API support: The MI300X lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan versions. The Arc Pro B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Release date: The MI300X released on December 5, 2023. The Arc Pro B370 releases on January 26, 2026.

Production status: The MI300X has no recorded status. The Arc Pro B370 is listed as active.

Predecessor: The MI300X succeeds FirePro Data Center. The Arc Pro B370 succeeds HD Graphics-WM.