AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X vs Intel Arc Pro B70 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X and the Intel Arc Pro B70?

A: The MI300X uses AMD's CDNA 3.0 architecture on the Aqua Vanjaram chip, while the Arc Pro B70 uses Intel's Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G31 chip. The MI300X is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, whereas the Arc Pro B70 also uses a 5 nm TSMC process but has a smaller 368 mm² die with an unknown transistor count.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The MI300X features 192 GB of HBM3 memory on an 8192-bit bus with 10.3 TB/s bandwidth. The Arc Pro B70 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 608.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI300X's memory bandwidth is approximately 17 times greater.

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The Arc Pro B70 has a base clock of 2280 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The MI300X runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 2100 MHz, making the Intel card substantially faster in raw clock frequency.

Q: What are the FP32 and FP16 performance figures?

A: The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 (8:1). The Arc Pro B70 delivers 22.94 TFLOPS FP32 and 45.88 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The MI300X leads by roughly 3.6 times in FP32 and about 14 times in FP16.

Q: Do these cards support standard graphics APIs?

A: The Arc Pro B70 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and includes display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1). The MI300X lists no API support and has no display outputs, indicating it is designed for compute workloads rather than graphics.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI300X has a TDP of 750 W and a suggested PSU of 1150 W, with no power connectors (OAM Module form factor). The Arc Pro B70 has a TDP of 230 W, a suggested PSU of 550 W, and uses a single 8-pin connector.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X and the Intel Arc Pro B70 represent two fundamentally different design philosophies. The MI300X is built around AMD's CDNA 3.0 architecture, which is optimized for data center compute, machine learning, and high-throughput workloads. Its chip, Aqua Vanjaram, contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². This massive chip is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process.

The Intel Arc Pro B70 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage generation for professional graphics. The BMG-G31 chip measures 368 mm², also on a 5 nm TSMC process. The transistor count is not recorded in the database, so a direct density comparison is not possible. The architectural focus differs: Xe2-HPG is designed for graphics and professional visualization, with support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, plus display outputs. The MI300X exposes no graphics APIs and no display outputs, confirming its role as an accelerator rather than a graphics card.

Compute resource allocation diverges sharply. The MI300X carries 19,456 shading units, 1,216 texture mapping units, and no ROPs, with a pixel rate of 0 MPixel/s. Its texture rate is 2,553.6 GTexel/s. The Arc Pro B70 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 358.4 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 716.8 GTexel/s. The MI300X has no dedicated ray tracing hardware listed, while the Arc Pro B70 includes 32 RT cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

The memory architectures also reflect divergent goals. The MI300X uses HBM3 with 192 GB capacity, an 8192-bit bus, and 10.3 TB/s bandwidth, with memory clocked at 2525 MHz (10.1 Gbps effective). The Arc Pro B70 uses GDDR6 with 32 GB capacity, a 256-bit bus, and 608.0 GB/s bandwidth, at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The MI300X's extremely wide memory bus is typical of compute accelerators that need to feed thousands of shader units. The Intel card's narrower bus with faster per-pin signaling suits a graphics-oriented workload pattern.

Power delivery differs as well. The MI300X is an OAM Module with a 750 W TDP and no power connectors, requiring a 1150 W suggested PSU. The Arc Pro B70 is a dual-slot card with a 230 W TDP, a single 8-pin connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU. Physical dimensions for the Intel card are recorded at 267 mm length, 110 mm height, and 39 mm width; no dimensions are listed for the AMD accelerator.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two products, and neither card has individual benchmark scores or nearest rival data. The average benchmark score for both is 0, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. This means a direct performance comparison must be inferred from the recorded specification data rather than measured workloads.

The largest gap in the recorded specifications is memory bandwidth. The MI300X delivers 10.3 TB/s against the Arc Pro B70's 608.0 GB/s, a difference of roughly 17 times. This bandwidth advantage is decisive for memory-bound compute kernels, large model inference, and data movement-heavy workloads. The MI300X also leads in raw compute throughput: 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 versus 22.94 TFLOPS, a 3.6 times advantage, and 653.7 TFLOPS FP16 versus 45.88 TFLOPS, a 14.2 times advantage.

The Arc Pro B70 counters in several areas. Its base clock of 2280 MHz and boost clock of 2800 MHz are more than double the MI300X's 1000 MHz base and 2100 MHz boost. The Intel card has a pixel rate of 358.4 GPixel/s while the MI300X records 0 MPixel/s, since the AMD part has no ROPs. The Arc Pro B70 also has 128 ROPs and 32 ray tracing cores, features entirely absent from the MI300X's specification. Its texture rate of 716.8 GTexel/s is lower than the MI300X's 2,553.6 GTexel/s, a 3.6 times deficit that mirrors the FP32 ratio.

Memory capacity favors the MI300X at 192 GB versus 32 GB, a 6 times difference. The memory type also differs: HBM3 versus GDDR6, with the MI300X using an 8192-bit bus against the Arc Pro B70's 256-bit bus. The Intel card's memory runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed, while the MI300X memory runs at 2525 MHz with 10.1 Gbps effective speed. The higher per-pin data rate on the Intel card does not compensate for the far narrower bus.

Power efficiency metrics can be derived from the recorded TDP and performance figures. The MI300X delivers 81.72 TFLOPS FP32 at 750 W, which is 0.109 TFLOPS per watt. The Arc Pro B70 delivers 22.94 TFLOPS FP32 at 230 W, which is 0.100 TFLOPS per watt. The MI300X holds a modest efficiency edge in FP32, and a much larger edge in FP16 where its 653.7 TFLOPS at 750 W yields 0.872 TFLOPS per watt against the Arc Pro B70's 45.88 TFLOPS at 230 W, or 0.199 TFLOPS per watt.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X | Intel Arc Pro B70 |

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

| Architecture | CDNA 3.0 | Xe2-HPG |

| Chip | Aqua Vanjaram | BMG-G31 |

| Generation | Radeon Instinct (MIx) | Battlemage (Pro Series) |

| Die Size | 1017 mm² | 368 mm² |

| Transistors | 153,000 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 150.4M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 2280 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 2800 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2525 MHz, 10.1 Gbps effective | 2375 MHz, 19 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 192 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 10.3 TB/s | 608.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 19456 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 1216 | 256 |

| ROPs | 0 | 128 |

| RT Cores | null | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 358.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 2,553.6 GTexel/s | 716.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 81.72 TFLOPS | 22.94 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 653.7 TFLOPS (8:1) | 45.88 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 750 W | 230 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 1150 W | 550 W |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX | null | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | null | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | null | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | not recorded | 267 mm x 110 mm x 39 mm |

| Release Date | 2023-12-05 | 2026-03-25 |

| Launch MSRP | none recorded | 949 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI300X wins decisively in compute throughput. Its FP32 output of 81.72 TFLOPS is 3.6 times higher than the Arc Pro B70's 22.94 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 653.7 TFLOPS is 14.2 times higher. The 192 GB HBM3 memory pool with 10.3 TB/s bandwidth makes it suitable for workloads that require both large working sets and extremely fast data movement. The 8192-bit bus is the widest recorded in this comparison and directly supports the high shading unit count. For FP16-intensive workloads, the MI300X's 8:1 ratio means it can sustain very high throughput on reduced-precision operations, which is a common pattern in machine learning training and inference.

The Intel Arc Pro B70 wins in graphics-oriented specifications. It has 128 ROPs and a 358.4 GPixel/s pixel rate, while the MI300X records zero ROPs and zero pixel throughput. The 32 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering, a feature the MI300X does not list. The Intel card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and includes display outputs for direct monitor connection. The MI300X has no API support and no display outputs, so it cannot function as a graphics card in any conventional sense.

Clock speed is another area where the Arc Pro B70 leads. Its 2280 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost clocks are more than double the MI300X's respective 1000 MHz and 2100 MHz. Higher clocks benefit latency-sensitive workloads and graphics rendering where per-thread execution speed matters more than aggregate throughput.

Power and physical integration favor the Intel card. At 230 W with a 550 W suggested PSU, it fits into standard workstation builds with a single 8-pin connector. The dual-slot form factor and recorded dimensions of 267 mm by 110 mm by 39 mm make it a conventional card. The MI300X requires 750 W, a 1150 W suggested PSU, and an OAM Module slot with no power connectors, which implies a server or rack-based deployment.

Release timing also differs. The MI300X was released on 2023-12-05, while the Arc Pro B70 is dated 2026-03-25. The Intel part is a later product and targets a different segment: professional graphics with API compatibility, display outputs, and ray tracing. The AMD part is an earlier data center accelerator with no display or graphics API support.

The recorded launch MSRP of 949 USD for the Arc Pro B70 is the only pricing data available; the MI300X has no launch MSRP recorded. The use-case split is therefore clear from specifications alone. The MI300X is built for compute density and memory bandwidth, winning in FP32, FP16, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. The Arc Pro B70 is built for professional graphics and rendering, winning in pixel rate, ray tracing, API support, clock speed, and power integration.