AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual uses the BMG-G21 chip based on Xe2-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel chip has a larger die size at 272 mm² compared to 204 mm², and a higher transistor count of 19,600 million versus 13,300 million.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 456.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card has a memory clock of 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) versus the AMD card's 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective).

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W and no power connectors required. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual has a TDP of 400 W with a suggested PSU of 800 W and requires a single 16-pin power connector. The AMD card is single-slot, while the Intel card is dual-slot.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual measures 300 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The AMD card is significantly more compact.

Q: How do the FP32 and FP16 compute rates compare?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The Intel card has a substantial advantage in FP16 throughput.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual represent two fundamentally different GPU designs. The AMD card is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel card uses the Xe2-HPG architecture with the BMG-G21 chip, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation.

Manufacturing processes differ significantly. The AMD chip uses a 6 nm TSMC process, while the Intel chip uses a 5 nm TSMC process. This process advantage contributes to the Intel chip's higher transistor density of 72.1M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm² for the AMD chip. The Intel chip contains 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, while the AMD chip contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. These figures indicate that the Intel chip is both larger and more densely packed.

The compute architectures diverge in their execution resource allocation. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The Intel card has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The Intel card also has 20 ray tracing cores versus 28 on the AMD card, which means the AMD card has more dedicated RT hardware despite having fewer shading units overall.

Clock behavior also differs markedly. The AMD card has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, which are relatively low figures. The Intel card has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, substantially higher. This clock disparity partially explains the performance differences in pixel and texture throughput.

The memory architecture shows clear divergence. The AMD card uses a 128-bit memory bus with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. The Intel card uses a 192-bit memory bus with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory, triple the capacity. Memory bandwidth figures confirm the Intel advantage: 456.0 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s, a factor of roughly 2.6.

The bus interface differs as well. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel card uses PCIe 5.0 x8, providing twice the per-lane bandwidth for the Intel card. The power delivery systems are entirely different: the AMD card draws power solely from the slot with no connectors, while the Intel card requires a 16-pin connector and a significantly larger PSU recommendation.

The FP16 processing ratio also distinguishes the two architectures. The AMD card processes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning both data types achieve the same throughput of 7.885 TFLOPS. The Intel card processes FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, achieving 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 versus 12.29 TFLOPS FP32. This indicates the Intel architecture has dedicated FP16 throughput capabilities that the AMD design does not emphasize.

Physical design reflects the performance envelope. The AMD card measures 168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm and occupies a single slot. The Intel card measures 300 mm by 110 mm by 40 mm and occupies two slots. The AMD card's compact size and low power requirements make it suitable for space-constrained workstations, while the Intel card's larger footprint accommodates its higher power draw and cooling needs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two cards. However, the specification differences provide a basis for performance comparison across several measurable metrics.

The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual delivers a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, which is more than 2.7 times the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s. This indicates that the Intel card has a substantial advantage in fill-rate-bound workloads such as high-resolution rasterization. The texture rate follows a similar pattern: the Intel card achieves 384.0 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s for the AMD card, a margin of roughly 3.1 times.

The FP32 compute performance shows a clear but narrower gap. The Intel card delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32, which is approximately 1.56 times the AMD card's 7.885 TFLOPS. In FP16 workloads, the gap widens considerably. The Intel card achieves 24.58 TFLOPS FP16, which is approximately 3.12 times the AMD card's 7.885 TFLOPS. This makes the Intel card particularly well-suited for workloads that leverage mixed-precision or FP16 computation.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the Intel card dominates. The 456.0 GB/s bandwidth of the Intel card is approximately 2.64 times the 172.8 GB/s of the AMD card. The memory capacity difference is even more pronounced: 24 GB versus 8 GB, a factor of 3. This capacity advantage allows the Intel card to hold larger datasets on-die, reducing the need for PCIe transfers.

The Intel card also has higher raw resource counts. Its 2560 shading units represent a 1.43 times advantage over the AMD card's 1792. The 160 TMUs are 1.43 times the AMD card's 112. The 80 ROPs are 1.25 times the AMD card's 64. These ratios suggest that the Intel card maintains a consistent architectural advantage in parallel execution resources.

Clock speeds amplify the Intel advantage. The Intel card's boost clock of 2400 MHz is more than double the AMD card's boost clock of 1100 MHz. The base clock difference is even larger: 2000 MHz versus 330 MHz, a factor of approximately 6.1. These clock differences explain why the Intel card achieves higher throughput despite the AMD card having more ray tracing cores.

The AMD card does hold advantages in certain areas. Its 28 ray tracing cores exceed the Intel card's 20 by 40 percent. The AMD card also has a lower power draw of 55 W versus 400 W, which has implications for thermal management and system sizing. The AMD card's smaller physical footprint (168 mm versus 300 mm in length) allows installation in smaller chassis.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7400 | Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe2-HPG |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 19,600 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 272 mm² |

| Base Clock | 330 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps) | 2375 MHz (19 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 456.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 112 | 160 |

| ROPs | 64 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.885 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 400 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 800 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Length | 168 mm | 300 mm |

| Height | 69 mm | 110 mm |

| Width | 20 mm | 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2025-08-02 | 2025-09-04 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 1,199 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in scenarios that prioritize power efficiency and physical compactness. Its 55 W TDP with no power connectors allows installation in systems with minimal PSU requirements, and its single-slot, 168 mm length profile fits in space-constrained chassis. The AMD card also has more ray tracing cores at 28 versus 20, which may benefit workloads that rely heavily on RT hardware acceleration. For workstations where thermal output and physical footprint are primary constraints, the AMD card is the appropriate choice.

The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual wins in compute-intensive and memory-heavy workloads. Its 24 GB memory capacity and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a significant advantage for large dataset processing. The FP16 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is more than three times the AMD card's FP16 capability, making it suitable for machine learning inference and training tasks that use mixed precision. The higher pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s indicate stronger performance in rendering tasks with high fill-rate demands.

The Intel card's 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 compute advantage, combined with its higher clock speeds, positions it favorably for general GPU compute workloads. The 2560 shading units and 160 TMUs provide more parallel execution capacity than the AMD card's 1792 shading units and 112 TMUs. The PCIe 5.0 x8 interface also offers higher host bandwidth for data transfers.

The AMD card's lower power draw of 55 W versus 400 W means it can be deployed in systems where the Intel card would require significant power delivery infrastructure. The AMD card's release date of 2025-08-02 precedes the Intel card's 2025-09-04 release, though both are currently active production parts. The Intel card has a recorded launch MSRP of 1,199 USD, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD card.

For workloads that fit within the AMD card's 8 GB memory capacity and do not require high FP16 throughput, the AMD card delivers adequate compute with minimal system impact. For workloads that demand large memory footprints, high bandwidth, or intensive FP16 computation, the Intel card's specifications indicate a clear advantage. The choice between these cards ultimately depends on whether the priority is computational throughput or system integration simplicity.