AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single recorded benchmark for the Intel Arc B370, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scores 1184. This places the Intel part at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, indicating that it sits in the lower performance tier of the database. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so direct numerical comparison across identical workloads is not possible. However, architectural data provides a basis for evaluating expected performance differences.

The Intel Arc B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 12.29 TFLOPS of FP16 compute with a 2:1 ratio. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 and 7.885 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. In raw FP32 throughput, the AMD card leads by approximately 28% (7.885 versus 6.144 TFLOPS). In FP16 workloads, the Intel part holds a substantial advantage, delivering roughly 56% more throughput than the AMD card (12.29 versus 7.885 TFLOPS). This split is characteristic of the architectural priorities: the AMD part maintains equal rates across FP32 and FP16, while the Intel part leverages a 2:1 FP16 ratio for accelerated half-precision math.

Pixel throughput also favors AMD. The Radeon PRO W7400 achieves 70.40 GPixel/s, while the Arc B370 reaches 48.00 GPixel/s, a difference of about 47% in favor of AMD. Texture rate follows a similar pattern, with the AMD card delivering 123.2 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s for Intel, an advantage of roughly 28%. These rates are derived directly from the shading unit, TMU, and ROP configurations: the AMD part has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the Intel part has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs.

The nearest rivals in the database for the Intel Arc B370 are all older discrete GPUs. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, which is 0.2% higher than the Arc B370. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower. These delta values show that the Arc B370 performs within a very tight band around these legacy parts, effectively matching them in the Steel Nomad test despite being a modern integrated graphics solution.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in scenarios that demand high FP32 compute, pixel fill, and texture throughput. Its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 rating supports general-purpose graphics workloads, including traditional rasterization, where the higher ROP count of 64 enables faster pixel processing. The 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 123.2 GTexel/s texture rate give it a clear edge in resolution-heavy rendering tasks, where fill rate bottlenecks are common. The dedicated 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth provides a fixed, consistent memory pool for graphics data, which is absent in the Intel part.

The Intel Arc B370 wins in FP16 compute and in power efficiency. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 throughput is the highest recorded figure in this comparison, making it suitable for workloads that use half-precision math, such as certain machine learning inference or compute shaders. The 2:1 FP16 ratio indicates that the hardware doubles throughput when operating in half precision, a feature that the AMD part lacks. Additionally, the Intel part has a TDP of 25 W versus 55 W for the AMD card, meaning it delivers its FP16 peak at less than half the power draw. The Intel part also uses system-shared memory, which eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM allocation and can simplify memory management in integrated contexts.

The Intel Arc B370 has a higher boost clock at 2400 MHz versus 1100 MHz for the AMD part, though the AMD card has a higher base clock at 330 MHz versus 300 MHz. The boost clock advantage for Intel partially compensates for its lower shader count, but the FP32 and pixel rate gaps remain decisive in AMD's favor for standard graphics workloads.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the stronger choice for traditional graphics rendering and FP32 compute. It leads by 28% in FP32 TFLOPS, 47% in pixel rate, and 28% in texture rate. The dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures predictable memory performance, which is critical for sustained rendering workloads. The AMD part also supports DisplayPort 2.1 outputs across four connections, making it suitable for multi-display professional setups.

The Intel Arc B370 is the better choice for FP16-heavy compute tasks and for power-constrained environments. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 output exceeds the AMD card by 56%, and its 25 W TDP is less than half the AMD part's 55 W. As an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors, it requires no additional cooling or power delivery hardware beyond the host system. However, its 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its near-identical scores to ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000 indicate that its absolute performance is low compared to the broader GPU landscape.

The data shows that the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the superior choice for any workload where FP32 throughput, pixel fill, or texture filtering dominates. The Intel Arc B370 is the superior choice only where FP16 throughput or power draw is the primary constraint. Neither part has a recorded head-to-head benchmark against the other, so the verdict rests on the architectural specifications. The AMD part's 50th percentile ranking versus the Intel part's 5th percentile ranking further confirms that the AMD card occupies a higher performance tier in the database's overall distribution.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32, which is 28% higher than the Intel Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS.

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

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It is 0.2% lower than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% lower than the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), 0.7% lower than the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192), and 1.4% higher than the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc B370 uses system-shared memory, with bus width and bandwidth marked as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has a lower power draw?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has a TDP of 25 W, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W. The Intel part draws less than half the power of the AMD part.

Q: What is the FP16 performance difference?

A: The Intel Arc B370 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, which is 56% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ROPs?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs. The Intel Arc B370 has 1280 shading units and 20 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The Intel Arc B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

The AMD part is a discrete graphics card with a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, a single-slot form factor, and no power connectors. It requires a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no bus interface beyond the host system, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU requirement. The AMD card measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the Intel part has no recorded dimensions.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and fixed 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc B370 uses system-shared memory, where capacity, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent and not fixed by the GPU itself.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD part has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, with memory clocked at 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, with memory speed tied to the system.

Compute resources show a clear split. The AMD part has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. The AMD part's ROP count is triple that of Intel, while its TMU count is nearly triple.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the Intel Arc B370's display outputs are dependent on the portable device it is integrated into.

The release dates differ, with the AMD part released on 2025-08-02 and the Intel part on 2026-01-26. The AMD part lists its predecessor as Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel part has no predecessor recorded. Both parts are listed as active in production status.