AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Arc Pro B65 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark runs for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 against the Intel Arc Pro B65. Both entries have empty benchmark arrays and an average benchmark score of zero. Consequently, there are no direct performance deltas, no percentile shifts, and no win counts to report. The absence of measured results means any comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification data recorded for each product.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS. That is a 55.9% higher FP32 throughput for the Intel part based on the recorded figures. In FP16, the gap widens significantly: the AMD card sustains 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Intel card reaches 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which is 211.7% higher. The Intel part's doubling of FP16 throughput relative to its FP32 output indicates a different execution path, while the AMD card maintains a one-to-one ratio.

Memory bandwidth shows another decisive split. The Intel Arc Pro B65 accesses 608.0 GB/s across a 256-bit bus, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 manages 172.8 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. That places the Intel part 251.9% ahead in raw bandwidth. The Intel card also holds 32 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 8 GB on the AMD card, a 4x capacity advantage. Pixel throughput favors Intel at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 70.40 GPixel/s, a 172.7% lead. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 384.0 GTexel/s for Intel against 123.2 GTexel/s for AMD, a 211.7% advantage.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The AMD card lists a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost of 1100 MHz, while the Intel card runs at a fixed 2400 MHz for both base and boost. The AMD card's low base clock with a substantial boost range suggests power management that ramps up under load, whereas the Intel card maintains a constant frequency. Memory clocks also diverge: 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) on AMD versus 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) on Intel.

The process and physical characteristics favor Intel in density but not in efficiency per watt. Intel uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while AMD uses a 6 nm process from the same foundry. Intel packs 19,600 million transistors into a 272 mm² die, yielding 72.1M transistors per mm². AMD packs 13,300 million into 204 mm², yielding 65.2M per mm². The Intel die is 33.3% larger by area and holds 47.4% more transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins on power efficiency and physical footprint. Its thermal design power is 55 W, compared to 200 W for the Intel Arc Pro B65. The AMD card requires no external power connectors, while the Intel card needs a single 8-pin connector. The suggested power supply is 250 W for AMD versus 550 W for Intel. The AMD card is single-slot with dimensions of 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width. The Intel card is dual-slot with no recorded dimensions. For constrained chassis designs or systems with limited power headroom, the AMD card presents a clear advantage.

The Intel Arc Pro B65 wins on raw compute, memory capacity, and bandwidth. Its FP32 output is 55.9% higher, and its FP16 output is 211.7% higher. The 32 GB memory pool is four times larger, and the 608.0 GB/s bandwidth is 251.9% higher. The Intel card also uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8. That interface difference matters for data transfer rates to and from the host system. The Intel card's 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units all exceed the AMD card's 1792, 112, and 64 respectively.

Ray tracing hardware differs in count but not necessarily in capability. The AMD card has 28 ray tracing cores, while the Intel card has 20. Without benchmark data, the relative performance of these RT implementations cannot be quantified. The core counts alone do not determine ray tracing throughput, as architecture efficiency and driver behavior play significant roles.

The AMD card has a higher transistor density per watt. It delivers 65.2M transistors per mm² at 55 W, while the Intel card delivers 72.1M per mm² at 200 W. The efficiency ratio favors AMD by a wide margin, but that comes with lower absolute performance.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a straightforward split. Users who require maximum FP32 or FP16 throughput, large memory buffers, and high bandwidth should select the Intel Arc Pro B65. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP32, 24.58 TFLOPS FP16, 32 GB capacity, and 608.0 GB/s bandwidth place it clearly ahead on paper. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface also provides a wider host connection.

Users who prioritize power consumption, physical size, and system integration simplicity should select the AMD Radeon PRO W7400. Its 55 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for compact or low-power systems. The 250 W suggested PSU requirement is substantially lower than the 550 W requirement for the Intel card.

The AMD card's release date is earlier in the database: 2025-08-02, while the Intel card is dated 2026-03-31. Both are marked as Active in production status. The AMD card lists a predecessor, the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel card has no predecessor recorded.

No benchmark scores exist for either card, so the percentileVsAllGpus field shows 50 for both, indicating no measured standing relative to other GPUs. The verdict must therefore rest on the specification sheet alone. The Intel card dominates in compute and memory metrics. The AMD card dominates in power and form factor metrics. There is no overlap where one card offers both sets of advantages.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32, which is 55.9% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory capacity compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB. The Intel card holds four times the memory.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and requires no external power connectors. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has a TDP of 200 W and uses one 8-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 250 W for AMD and 550 W for Intel.

Q: Does the AMD card support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has 20 ray tracing cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 provides 608.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 provides 172.8 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. Intel leads by 251.9%.

Q: Which card has a smaller physical footprint?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is single-slot with dimensions of 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width. The Intel Arc Pro B65 is dual-slot with no dimensions recorded.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses the BMG-G21 chip with Xe2-HPG architecture and belongs to the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. The AMD card has a codename; the Intel card does not.

Process nodes differ by one step. AMD uses a 6 nm process from TSMC, while Intel uses a 5 nm process from the same foundry. Transistor counts diverge: AMD packs 13,300 million into a 204 mm² die, while Intel packs 19,600 million into a 272 mm² die. Transistor density is 65.2M per mm² for AMD and 72.1M per mm² for Intel.

Clock behavior reflects different design philosophies. The AMD card has a wide boost range from 330 MHz base to 1100 MHz boost. The Intel card runs at a flat 2400 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks also differ: AMD runs at 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective, while Intel runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective.

Compute unit organization varies. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Intel card has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Ray tracing cores number 28 on AMD and 20 on Intel. Neither card records tensor cores.

FP16 execution differs. The AMD card processes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning both hit 7.885 TFLOPS. The Intel card processes FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 24.58 TFLOPS against 12.29 TFLOPS FP32. This indicates the Intel architecture has a dedicated or more efficient FP16 path.

Bus interfaces differ by generation and width. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel card uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Both cards output via 4x DisplayPort 2.1. API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Physical specifications diverge. The AMD card is single-slot, 168 mm long, 69 mm high, and 20 mm wide. The Intel card is dual-slot with no recorded dimensions. Power delivery also differs: AMD uses no external connectors, while Intel uses a single 8-pin. The AMD card has a 55 W TDP; the Intel card has a 200 W TDP.

Release timing shows a gap. The AMD card entered production status on 2025-08-02. The Intel card is dated 2026-03-31. The AMD card's predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel card has no predecessor recorded. Neither card has a successor listed.