AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs Intel Arc Pro B65 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and Intel Arc Pro B65 compare in terms of memory capacity?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B65 provides 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 608.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than double the capacity and bandwidth of the AMD card.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 has a boost clock of 2400 MHz, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 boosts to 2440 MHz. The AMD card holds a slight advantage of 40 MHz in boost clock.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 delivers 19.99 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, whereas the Intel Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS. The AMD card is approximately 63% ahead in raw single-precision floating-point throughput.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores available for the Intel Arc Pro B65?

A: The database lists no benchmark entries for the Intel Arc Pro B65. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50. In contrast, the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 81528 and 92688, respectively, with an average score of 87108 and a percentile of 93.

Q: What process nodes do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Arc Pro B65 uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The Intel card uses a smaller node, which may contribute to its higher transistor density.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 300 W suggested PSU with a single 6-pin power connector. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has a TDP of 200 W, needs a 550 W suggested PSU, and uses a single 8-pin connector.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish" and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses the BMG-G21 chip based on the Xe2-HPG architecture and belongs to the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. These are fundamentally different GPU designs, with AMD focusing on a graphics compute-heavy approach and Intel leveraging a newer Xe2-HPG architecture aimed at professional workloads.

The process nodes differ: AMD uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while Intel uses a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel chip packs 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, yielding a density of 72.1M transistors per mm². The AMD chip has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a density of 65.2M per mm². The Intel card’s smaller process node and larger die allow for more transistors, but the AMD card’s RDNA 3.0 architecture achieves higher raw FP32 throughput per transistor.

In terms of compute units, the AMD card has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the Intel card has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The Intel card offers more shading units and texture units, but the AMD card has 32 ray tracing cores compared to Intel’s 20. The AMD card’s ray tracing core count is higher, which may benefit certain rendering workloads.

Memory architecture diverges significantly. The AMD card uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card uses 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 608.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card’s memory subsystem is substantially larger, both in capacity and bandwidth, which is critical for large datasets and high-resolution textures. The AMD card’s memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the Intel card’s memory clock is 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective).

Bus interface differs as well: AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while Intel uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The Intel card’s PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides more bandwidth for data transfer with the host system, which may be relevant for workloads that stream large amounts of data between CPU and GPU. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both have 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and the Intel Arc Pro B65. The winsA and winsB fields are both 0, indicating no direct comparative tests were run. However, the AMD card has its own benchmark scores, which can be compared against the Intel card’s absence of scores.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 81528 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 92688. Its average benchmark score is 87108. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has no recorded benchmarks, so its average score is 0. This means the AMD card’s average score is 87108 points higher than the Intel card’s recorded score, though this comparison is limited because the Intel card lacks any measured data.

Looking at the AMD card’s nearest rivals in the database, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has an average score of 87445, which is 0.4% higher than the AMD card’s average. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX scores 85637, which is 1.7% lower. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile scores 91134, which is 4.4% higher, and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 scores 91671, which is 5% higher. These comparisons show that the AMD card sits in a competitive mid-range position among professional GPUs, with its closest rival being the NVIDIA Quadro GP100.

For the Intel Arc Pro B65, no nearest rivals are listed, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which places it at the median of the database’s GPU population. This is notably lower than the AMD card’s 93rd percentile. The percentile difference suggests that, based on the available data, the AMD card performs in the top 7% of all GPUs, while the Intel card is at the 50th percentile, but this conclusion relies on the fact that the Intel card has no benchmark scores, so its percentile may reflect a default or unmeasured status rather than actual performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7600 | Intel Arc Pro B65 |

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

| 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 |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 72.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1720 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2440 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 608.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 128 | 160 |

| ROPs | 64 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 156.2 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 312.3 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 19.99 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 130 W | 200 W |

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

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Release Date | 2023-08-02 | 2026-03-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | null |

The AMD card has a higher boost clock, more ray tracing cores, and significantly higher FP32 and FP16 throughput. The Intel card has more shading units, TMUs, ROPs, a larger memory pool, higher bandwidth, a faster base clock, a smaller process node, and a higher pixel and texture rate. The Intel card’s TDP is 70 W higher, and it requires a larger PSU. The AMD card was released in August 2023, while the Intel card’s release date is March 2026, indicating a later product cycle.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows that the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is a compute-oriented card with 19.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 63% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B65’s 12.29 TFLOPS. This makes the AMD card the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on raw floating-point throughput, such as scientific simulations, certain rendering tasks, and GPU-accelerated analytics. Its 93rd percentile ranking versus all GPUs, along with its average benchmark score of 87108, indicates it performs in the top tier of the database.

The Intel Arc Pro B65, however, offers 32 GB of memory with 608.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is four times the capacity and more than double the bandwidth of the AMD card. This makes it suited for memory-intensive applications, such as large-scale data processing, high-resolution texture streaming, or AI model inference with big batch sizes. Its base clock of 2400 MHz is higher than the AMD card’s 1720 MHz, and its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s exceed the AMD card’s 156.2 GPixel/s and 312.3 GTexel/s, respectively. These attributes favor workloads that are bandwidth-limited or fill-rate-bound.

The Intel card has no benchmark scores in the database, so its actual performance remains unmeasured. Its 50th percentile is a default placeholder rather than a validated result. This means users should interpret the Intel card’s performance potential with caution, as the data does not confirm any real-world speed. The AMD card, by contrast, has two Geekbench scores and a clear rivalry landscape, with the NVIDIA RTX A4500 being 5% faster on average.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins in compute-intensive scenarios. Its FP32 output of 19.99 TFLOPS is nearly double the Intel card’s 12.29 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output of 39.98 TFLOPS is similarly higher than the Intel card’s 24.58 TFLOPS. Workloads that rely on shader math, such as real-time graphics effects, physical simulations, or double-precision-adjacent tasks, will favor the AMD card. It also has 32 ray tracing cores versus the Intel card’s 20, which may provide an advantage in ray-traced rendering pipelines. The AMD card’s lower TDP of 130 W and single-slot design make it easier to integrate into space-constrained or power-limited systems.

The Intel Arc Pro B65 wins in memory-bound and fill-rate-bound scenarios. Its 32 GB memory capacity is four times larger than the AMD card’s 8 GB, and its 608.0 GB/s bandwidth is 111% higher than the AMD card’s 288.0 GB/s. For workloads that require large working sets, such as training or inference on large neural networks, processing high-resolution video frames, or handling massive texture atlases, the Intel card avoids memory spillover. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s are 23% and 23% higher than the AMD card’s respective rates, which benefits rasterization-heavy tasks. The Intel card’s PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides more host bandwidth than the AMD card’s PCIe 4.0 x8, which can speed up data transfers for streaming workloads.

The AMD card’s higher boost clock of 2440 MHz versus the Intel card’s 2400 MHz gives it a slight edge in clock-for-clock performance, but the Intel card’s base clock of 2400 MHz matches its boost, indicating a stable operating point. The AMD card’s 93rd percentile and average score of 87108 place it well above the Intel card’s unmeasured 50th percentile, so for users who rely on validated benchmark data, the AMD card is the safer choice. The Intel card’s later release date of 2026-03-31 suggests it is a newer design, but without benchmark scores, its actual performance cannot be confirmed from the database.