AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs Intel Arc B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and the Intel Arc B370. The AMD part holds an average benchmark score of 87,108 across its two recorded tests, while the Intel Arc B370 averages 1,184 from a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 run. That places the AMD product in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the Intel part sits in the 5th percentile.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 delivers 81,528 points in Geekbench OpenCL and 92,688 points in Geekbench Vulkan. These are substantial scores that place it alongside professional workstation parts. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA RTX A4500 at 91,671 average score (5% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile at 91,134 (4.4% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87,445 (0.4% higher), and the NVIDIA CMP 40HX at 85,637 (1.7% lower). The AMD card essentially trades blows with the Quadro GP100 while trailing the RTX A4500 desktop and mobile variants by a modest margin.

The Intel Arc B370's single recorded score of 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 places it near the bottom of the database. Its nearest rivals are all legacy parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 at 1,186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1,190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M at 1,192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 at 1,168 (1.4% lower). The Intel part is effectively within 1.4% of these older GPUs, indicating that its raw compute capabilities align with roughly a decade-old performance tier.

The compute throughput figures reinforce this divide. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 delivers 19.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 39.98 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio). The Intel Arc B370 manages 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). That is roughly a 3.25:1 advantage for AMD in both precision formats. Pixel fill rate favors AMD at 156.2 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s, and texture rate favors AMD at 312.3 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s.

The benchmark comparison is incomplete by design: the database contains no direct head-to-head test results between these two products, and the win counts are zero for both. However, the available separate benchmark data leaves little ambiguity about relative positioning. The AMD part is a discrete workstation GPU with dedicated memory and a 130 W TDP. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor with a 25 W TDP, sharing system memory. Their performance classes are not remotely comparable in the recorded metrics.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 than the Intel Arc B370 in raw compute?

A: The AMD GPU delivers 19.99 TFLOPS FP32 versus 6.144 TFLOPS for the Intel part, a 3.25:1 advantage. In FP16, AMD reaches 39.98 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS, the same ratio.

Q: What benchmark scores does each GPU have in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 scores 81,528 in Geekbench OpenCL and 92,688 in Geekbench Vulkan, averaging 87,108. The Intel Arc B370 has one recorded result: 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

Q: Where does each GPU rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 sits in the 93rd percentile, while the Intel Arc B370 sits in the 5th percentile.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: For AMD, the closest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87,445 average, 0.4% higher), NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637, 1.7% lower), NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134, 4.4% higher), and NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91,671, 5% higher). For Intel, the nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1,186, 0.2% higher), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190, 0.5% higher), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1,192, 0.7% higher), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1,168, 1.4% lower).

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc B370 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are the TDP figures for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has a 130 W TDP and requires a 300 W suggested PSU. The Intel Arc B370 has a 25 W TDP and requires no power connector.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins in every recorded compute category. Its pixel rate of 156.2 GPixel/s dwarfs the Intel part's 48.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 312.3 GTexel/s exceeds the Intel part's 96.00 GTexel/s by more than 3x. The shading unit count favors AMD at 2,048 versus 1,280, TMUs favor AMD at 128 versus 40, and ROPs favor AMD at 64 versus 20. Ray tracing cores also favor AMD at 32 versus 10.

For workloads that depend on dedicated memory bandwidth, the AMD card has a clear structural advantage. Its 288.0 GB/s of dedicated GDDR6 bandwidth is fixed and predictable, whereas the Intel part relies on system shared memory with bandwidth that the database lists as system dependent. The AMD card's 8 GB dedicated frame buffer also avoids the contention issues inherent to shared memory implementations.

The Intel Arc B370 wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. Its 25 W TDP is dramatically lower than the AMD card's 130 W. It requires no power connector and no suggested PSU, functioning as an integrated graphics processor. It also uses a 3 nm process node from Intel, whereas the AMD part uses a 6 nm node from TSMC. For systems where power draw and physical space are the primary constraints, the Intel part is the only viable option in this comparison.

The Intel part also wins on release recency. Its release date is 2026-01-26, while the AMD card launched on 2023-08-02. However, the newer release does not translate into competitive performance in the recorded data.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. Memory size differs: 8 GB GDDR6 for AMD versus system shared for Intel. Memory bus width differs: 128-bit for AMD versus system shared for Intel. Memory bandwidth differs: 288.0 GB/s for AMD versus system dependent for Intel.

Clock behavior differs significantly. The AMD card runs at a 1720 MHz base and 2440 MHz boost. The Intel part runs at a 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The AMD part has a higher base clock by a wide margin, and a slightly higher boost clock as well. The AMD memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the Intel memory clock is listed as system shared.

Slot and power specifications diverge completely. The AMD card is single-slot with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The Intel part is an IGP form factor with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD versus IGP for Intel. Display outputs differ: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD versus portable device dependent for Intel.

Physical dimensions exist only for the AMD card: 241 mm length (9.5 inches) and 115 mm height (4.5 inches). The Intel part has no recorded dimensions. The AMD card's TDP is 130 W, the Intel part's is 25 W. The AMD card's launch MSRP is 599 USD; the Intel part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation (Navi III Series). The chip is fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process, containing 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm².

The Intel Arc B370 uses the Panther Lake chip built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, with no recorded codename. It belongs to the Arc Graphics-M generation (Panther Lake). The chip is fabricated by Intel on a 3 nm process. Transistor count, die size, and transistor density are all recorded as unknown or null.

Compute unit organization differs as well. The AMD part has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 1,280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. Neither part has tensor cores recorded.

API support is identical between the two: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The production status is active for both. The AMD part has a recorded predecessor, the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel part has no predecessor or successor recorded. The AMD part also has no successor recorded.

The manufacturing approach differs fundamentally. AMD uses an external foundry (TSMC) with a larger node geometry. Intel uses its own foundry with a smaller 3 nm node. The transistor density for Intel is unknown, preventing a direct comparison of integration efficiency.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the only option for compute-heavy professional workloads. Its 19.99 TFLOPS FP32, 288.0 GB/s dedicated bandwidth, and 93rd percentile ranking place it in workstation territory. It competes directly with NVIDIA professional parts like the RTX A4500 and Quadro GP100, trailing the former by 5% and matching the latter within 0.4%. Its 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer and 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs suit multi-monitor professional environments.

The Intel Arc B370 is not a competitor in that space. Its 5th percentile ranking and 1,184 Steel Nomad score place it alongside GPUs from the ATI Radeon HD 5000 series era. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and system shared memory make it unsuitable for demanding rendering, simulation, or AI workloads. The 25 W TDP and IGP form factor indicate its role: low-power integrated graphics for portable devices.

For a workstation builder, the AMD card is the clear choice, provided the 130 W TDP and single-slot requirement fit the chassis. For a lightweight portable device where power draw and space are paramount, the Intel part is the only option that fits, but its performance ceiling is low.

The 3 nm process node gives Intel a manufacturing advantage, but the recorded performance data shows that node advantage does not translate into compute leadership here. The AMD part's larger die, higher transistor count, dedicated memory, and 3.25x FP32 advantage determine the outcome. The verdict is unambiguous: AMD wins on performance, Intel wins on power efficiency and integration.