AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc Pro B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Intel Arc Pro B370. Both products show an average benchmark score of 0, and the percentile versus all GPUs is identical at 50 for each. Without measured performance numbers, the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences documented in the database.

The FP32 compute figures provide the clearest mathematical separation. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 reaches 6.144 TFLOPS. That places the AMD part approximately 28% ahead of the Intel part in standard single-precision floating-point work, a meaningful gap for general compute workloads that scale with raw shader throughput.

The FP16 comparison flips decisively. The Intel Arc Pro B370 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, which is 56% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS. The Intel architecture implements a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, effectively doubling its FP32 throughput when operating in half-precision mode. The AMD part runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning no such acceleration exists. For machine learning inference, image processing, or any workload that tolerates reduced precision, the Intel part holds a substantial mathematical advantage.

Pixel and texture throughput also split the two products. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 renders at 70.40 GPixel/s and textures at 123.2 GTexel/s. The Intel Arc Pro B370 posts 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The AMD part leads by approximately 47% in pixel fill rate and 28% in texture fill rate, which suggests stronger performance in rasterization-bound scenarios such as high-resolution display output or heavy fragment shading.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, a relatively low frequency range that compensates for its 55 W TDP. The Intel Arc Pro B370 runs a base clock of 300 MHz but boosts to 2400 MHz, more than double the AMD boost figure, while consuming only 25 W. The Intel part achieves its FP16 advantage through this high boost clock combined with its 2:1 FP16 execution ratio.

The absence of measured benchmark scores means the database cannot confirm how these theoretical figures translate into real application performance. The architectural math is clear, but actual software behavior, driver efficiency, and workload scaling remain unquantified in the available records.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in raw FP32 compute, pixel fill rate, and texture fill rate. Its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 output, 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 123.2 GTexel/s texture rate all exceed the Intel Arc Pro B370's corresponding figures of 6.144 TFLOPS, 48.00 GPixel/s, and 96.00 GTexel/s. These metrics point to an advantage in conventional 3D rendering, CAD viewport manipulation, and single-precision simulation workloads. The AMD part also has dedicated memory in the form of 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128 bit bus and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Intel part relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described only as system dependent.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in FP16 compute by a wide margin. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 output is 56% higher than the AMD part's 7.885 TFLOPS, and its 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio provides a clear path for half-precision acceleration. The Intel part also consumes far less power, with a 25 W TDP versus the AMD part's 55 W, and operates as an integrated graphics processor with no separate slot requirement. Its boost clock of 2400 MHz far exceeds the AMD part's 1100 MHz boost, indicating a design oriented toward burst compute within a tight power envelope.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is a discrete, single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. It requires a suggested power supply of 250 W but draws power through the slot with no additional power connectors. The Intel Arc Pro B370 is an integrated part with no dimensions, no discrete bus interface, and display outputs described as portable device dependent. This makes the Intel part suitable for compact systems where a separate graphics card cannot be installed.

For memory bandwidth, the AMD part's 172.8 GB/s is a fixed, guaranteed figure. The Intel part's bandwidth is system dependent, meaning its actual performance varies with the host platform's memory configuration. In scenarios where predictable memory performance matters, the AMD part provides a documented specification, while the Intel part leaves the outcome to the system.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the stronger choice for FP32-centric professional workloads, including 3D rendering, rasterization, and texture-heavy operations. Its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, 123.2 GTexel/s texture rate, and dedicated 172.8 GB/s GDDR6 memory give it a clear edge in standard graphics compute. The 8 GB dedicated frame buffer also removes dependence on system RAM performance.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 is the stronger choice for FP16-centric workloads and power-constrained environments. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 output and 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio make it mathematically superior for half-precision tasks such as AI inference and certain image processing pipelines. Its 25 W TDP is less than half the AMD part's 55 W, and its integrated nature eliminates the need for a discrete slot, power connectors, or a dedicated power supply recommendation.

Users who need a discrete graphics card with multiple DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, fixed memory bandwidth, and higher FP32 throughput should select the AMD Radeon PRO W7400. Users who prioritize FP16 throughput, minimal power draw, and an integrated form factor should select the Intel Arc Pro B370. The database contains no benchmark scores to validate real-world application performance, so this verdict rests on the documented architectural specifications.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. The AMD part is approximately 28% higher.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP16 performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 achieves 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part is approximately 56% higher.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128 bit bus and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and no fixed capacity.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a 55 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 250 W. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a 25 W TDP and no suggested power supply is listed.

Q: What are the form factors of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is a single-slot discrete card measuring 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Intel Arc Pro B370 is an integrated graphics processor with no dimensions and an IGP bus interface.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 1792 shading units and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has 1280 shading units and 10 ray tracing cores.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel with unknown transistor count and die size. The Intel part belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM generation with no codename listed.

The AMD part implements 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel part implements 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 render output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. Neither part lists tensor cores in the database. The AMD part's pixel rate is 70.40 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s, while the Intel part's pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s.

FP16 execution differs fundamentally. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, producing 7.885 TFLOPS for both precision levels. The Intel Arc Pro B370 runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, producing 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 from its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 base. This architectural choice indicates the Intel design prioritizes half-precision throughput.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the Intel part's display outputs are described as portable device dependent.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and Intel Arc Pro B370 differ across every major specification field in the database.

The AMD part uses the Navi 33 chip on a 6 nm TSMC process with 13,300 million transistors and a 204 mm² die size. The Intel part uses the Panther Lake chip on a 3 nm Intel process with unknown transistor count and die size.

Clocks differ substantially. The AMD part runs at a 330 MHz base clock and 1100 MHz boost clock, with memory at 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). The Intel part runs at a 300 MHz base clock and 2400 MHz boost clock, with system shared memory.

The AMD part has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

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 delivers 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, 123.2 GTexel/s texture rate, 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, and 7.885 TFLOPS FP16. The Intel part delivers 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate, 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16.

The AMD part has a 55 W TDP, is single-slot, uses no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply. It connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The Intel part has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP, uses no power connectors, has no suggested power supply, uses an IGP bus interface, and has portable device dependent display outputs.

The AMD part measures 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm. The Intel part has no recorded dimensions.

Release dates also differ. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 released on 2025-08-02, and the Intel Arc Pro B370 releases on 2026-01-26. The AMD part's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, and the Intel part's predecessor is the HD Graphics-WM. Both are listed as active in production.