AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and the Intel Arc B770, though the comparison is limited by the available measurements. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has recorded benchmark scores that place it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel Arc B770 sits at the 50th percentile. The W7800's average benchmark score is 164,894, derived from two recorded tests, whereas the Arc B770 currently has no recorded benchmark scores and an average score of zero.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 delivers a score of 154,366. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, it reaches 175,422. The Intel Arc B770 has no entries in either test within the database, meaning no direct head-to-head numerical comparison can be made from recorded measurements. The absence of data for the Arc B770 is itself significant: the database shows a percentile rank of 50, which reflects a mid-pack standing among all GPUs, but without actual scores, the margin cannot be quantified.

The nearest rivals for the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 has an average score of 165,217, which is 0.2% higher than the W7800's average. The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation scores 166,094, a 0.7% advantage. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X leads the group with 168,574, putting it 2.2% ahead. The only rival the W7800 beats is the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, which scores 162,504 and trails by 1.5%. These margins are all within a narrow band, indicating that the W7800 performs at a level comparable to premium workstation cards from the previous generation, but the Intel Arc B770 has no such rival data to anchor its position.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito and a generation designation of Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). The Intel Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, with the generation designation Battlemage (Arc 7). Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The AMD chip contains 57,700 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², giving a transistor density of 109.1 million per mm². The Intel chip has an unknown transistor count but a smaller die size of 368 mm², with no density figure recorded. This means the W7800 packs substantially more transistors onto a larger die, which correlates with its higher compute throughput.

The memory configurations differ significantly. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 carries 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Intel Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on the same 256-bit bus width, resulting in 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W7800 offers double the capacity and 12.5% more memory bandwidth, a meaningful gap for large dataset workloads.

Compute resources also favor AMD. The W7800 has 4,480 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores. The Arc B770 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. The W7800 leads in shading units by 384, in TMUs by 24, and in ray tracing cores by 38. The ROP count is identical at 128.

Clock speeds tell a mixed story. The Intel Arc B770 has a higher base clock at 2100 MHz versus the AMD's 1895 MHz, but the AMD boost clock reaches 2525 MHz versus Intel's 2400 MHz. The memory clock is also higher on the AMD, running at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the Intel runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

The resulting throughput figures favor AMD substantially. The W7800 achieves a pixel rate of 323.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 707.0 GTexel/s, compared to the Arc B770's 307.2 GPixel/s and 614.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute performance is where the gap widest: the W7800 delivers 45.25 TFLOPS against the Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS, a 2.3x advantage. FP16 performance follows the same pattern, with the W7800 at 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) versus the Arc B770's 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Intel Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. Both use a 256-bit memory bus.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 delivers 45.25 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS, less than half of the AMD's output.

Q: How do their ray tracing core counts compare?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has 70 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc B770 has 32 ray tracing cores, a deficit of 38.

Q: Do both cards use the same process node?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and the Intel Arc B770 are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has a TDP of 260 W, while the Intel Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W. The AMD card requires a 600 W suggested PSU, while the Intel card suggests a 550 W PSU.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 boosts to 2525 MHz, which is 125 MHz higher than the Intel Arc B770's boost clock of 2400 MHz. The Intel card has a higher base clock at 2100 MHz versus the AMD's 1895 MHz.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across several key specification fields. The die size is one: the AMD Navi 31 chip measures 529 mm², while the Intel BMG-G31 chip measures 368 mm². Transistor counts also diverge, with the AMD at 57,700 million transistors and the Intel listed as unknown. The AMD has a transistor density of 109.1M per mm², while the Intel has no recorded density. The chip names differ as well, with AMD using Navi 31 and Intel using BMG-G31, and the architectures are RDNA 3.0 versus Xe2-HPG.

Memory capacity is a clear differentiator: 32 GB on the AMD versus 16 GB on the Intel. Memory bandwidth follows, with 576.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s. The shading unit count is 4,480 versus 4,096, the TMU count is 280 versus 256, and the ray tracing core count is 70 versus 32. The ROP count is the same at 128 for both.

Clock speeds differ on both ends: base clocks are 1895 MHz for AMD and 2100 MHz for Intel, while boost clocks are 2525 MHz for AMD and 2400 MHz for Intel. The memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) on the AMD and 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on the Intel. Pixel rate is 323.2 GPixel/s on the AMD versus 307.2 GPixel/s on the Intel, and texture rate is 707.0 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 45.25 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power requirements differ, with the AMD at 260 W TDP and the Intel at 225 W TDP. The power connectors are 2x 8-pin on the AMD and 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin on the Intel. The suggested PSU is 600 W for the AMD and 550 W for the Intel. Display outputs differ, with the AMD offering 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, while the Intel offers 1x HDMI 2.1a plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for both.

Release dates are recorded as 2023-04-12 for the AMD and 2025-12-31 for the Intel. The AMD lists a predecessor of Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel lists Alchemist. The AMD has a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD, while the Intel has no recorded launch MSRP. The AMD has production status marked as Active, while the Intel has no production status recorded. Physical dimensions are available for the AMD (280 mm length, 110 mm height, 40 mm width) but not for the Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins on nearly every measurable performance metric in the database. Its FP32 compute of 45.25 TFLOPS is more than double the Intel Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS, which means workloads that rely on raw shader throughput will favor the AMD card by a wide margin. The FP16 figure of 90.50 TFLOPS versus 39.32 TFLOPS reinforces this advantage for compute-heavy tasks. The W7800 also leads in pixel rate at 323.2 GPixel/s versus 307.2 GPixel/s, and in texture rate at 707.0 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s, making it the stronger choice for rasterization-heavy rendering.

Memory capacity is another clear win for the AMD. With 32 GB versus 16 GB, the W7800 can hold larger datasets, textures, and model weights in VRAM without spilling to system memory. Its bandwidth advantage of 576.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s further supports high-throughput data movement. The ray tracing core count of 70 versus 32 gives the AMD a structural advantage in ray-traced scenes, assuming the cores scale with workload efficiency.

The Intel Arc B770 wins in a few specific areas. Its base clock of 2100 MHz is higher than the AMD's 1895 MHz, which could translate to better sustained performance in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks that do not push the boost ceiling. Its TDP of 225 W is lower than the AMD's 260 W, meaning it draws less power and requires a smaller suggested PSU at 550 W versus 600 W. The Intel card also has a smaller die at 368 mm² versus 529 mm², which may have cost or yield implications, though no pricing data is recorded for the Intel card.

The Intel card's display output array includes an HDMI 2.1a port, which the AMD card lacks in favor of an additional mini-DisplayPort 2.1. For setups that rely on HDMI connections, the Intel card offers a direct fit. The AMD card's four DisplayPort outputs, including a mini-DisplayPort, provide more flexible multi-monitor configurations for DisplayPort-native displays.

The benchmark database currently shows no recorded scores for the Intel Arc B770, so its real-world standing cannot be quantified against the AMD's 154,366 OpenCL and 175,422 Vulkan results. The AMD's 97th percentile rank among all GPUs places it at the top tier of the database, while the Intel's 50th percentile rank suggests a mid-range position, but the absence of Intel scores means this rank is provisional. The data indicates that for users prioritizing compute throughput, memory capacity, and ray tracing resources, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the stronger option. For users prioritizing lower power draw, a higher base clock, and HDMI output, the Intel Arc B770 holds specific advantages.