AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs Intel Arc Pro B70 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains mixed results for these two workstation accelerators, with the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 holding a clear performance advantage while the Intel Arc Pro B70 counters with substantial architectural efficiency gains.

In Geekbench OpenCL compute workloads, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 records a score of 154,366. The Intel Arc Pro B70 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so a direct numerical comparison is impossible. However, the AMD card's average benchmark score of 164,894 places it at the 97th percentile among all GPUs tracked in the database, indicating top-tier compute performance. The Intel Arc Pro B70, by contrast, sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0, reflecting the absence of recorded benchmark data rather than actual performance.

The AMD card's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 posts an average score of 165,217, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD card. The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation achieves 166,094, a 0.7% advantage. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X scores 168,574, putting it 2.2% ahead. The only rival the AMD card beats directly is the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, which scores 162,504, a 1.5% deficit relative to the W7800. These margins are tight, with the AMD card essentially trading places with several high-end NVIDIA workstation accelerators.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 records 175,422, a stronger result than its OpenCL score. This suggests the RDNA 3.0 architecture handles Vulkan's lower-level API overhead particularly well.

The Intel Arc Pro B70's absence from the benchmark database means its actual performance cannot be measured against the AMD card. The database shows no head-to-head benchmark entries, no wins for either card, and no rival comparisons for the Intel product. This is a significant gap in the available data, and any analysis of relative performance must acknowledge that the Intel card's capabilities are currently undocumented.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates that the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the only one of these two cards with verified benchmark performance. Its 97th percentile standing among all GPUs, combined with an average score of 164,894, positions it as a high-end workstation accelerator. The Intel Arc Pro B70, with no benchmark scores and a 50th percentile rating, cannot be assessed for compute performance from the current database.

For workloads measured by Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the AMD card delivers verified results. The Intel card's specifications suggest it targets a different segment, but without benchmark data, the database cannot support any performance comparison.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800's nearest rivals are all NVIDIA workstation cards within a 2.2% band, indicating that it competes directly with established NVIDIA offerings. The Intel Arc Pro B70 has no nearest rivals listed, which further limits comparative analysis.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Radeon PRO W7800?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has an average benchmark score of 164,894 across the recorded tests.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B70 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the database contains no benchmark entries for the Intel Arc Pro B70, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 compare to the NVIDIA RTX A5500?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 has an average score of 165,217, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7800's average score.

Q: What percentile does the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 achieve among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is in the 97th percentile among all GPUs tracked in the database.

Q: What is the only nearest rival that the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 beats?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 beats the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, which has an average score of 162,504, a 1.5% deficit relative to the AMD card.

Q: What is the Intel Arc Pro B70's percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B70 is in the 50th percentile among all GPUs, though this reflects its lack of recorded benchmark data.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip with 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, while the Intel Arc Pro B70 uses the BMG-G31 chip with an unknown transistor count on a 368 mm² die. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The AMD card runs at a 1895 MHz base clock and 2525 MHz boost clock, while the Intel card runs faster at 2280 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the AMD card uses 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, while the Intel card uses 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed.

Memory capacity is identical at 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but bandwidth favors the Intel card: 608.0 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s for AMD.

The compute unit counts differ. The AMD card has 4480 shading units, 280 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores. The Intel card has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores.

Pixel and texture rates are close. The AMD card delivers 323.2 GPixel/s and 707.0 GTexel/s, while the Intel card delivers 358.4 GPixel/s and 716.8 GTexel/s.

FP32 and FP16 compute favor AMD significantly. The AMD card delivers 45.25 TFLOPS FP32 and 90.50 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the Intel card delivers 22.94 TFLOPS FP32 and 45.88 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

Power requirements differ. The AMD card has a 260 W TDP with dual 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 600 W PSU. The Intel card has a 230 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested 550 W PSU.

Physical dimensions are similar. The AMD card measures 280 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The Intel card measures 267 mm, 110 mm, and 39 mm. Both are dual-slot cards.

The bus interface differs: AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while Intel uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Display outputs differ. The AMD card has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The Intel card has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Plum Bonito codename, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B70 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature sets are identical.

The chip designs differ fundamentally. AMD's Navi 31 uses a chiplet-based approach with 57,700 million transistors, while Intel's BMG-G31 is a monolithic design with an undisclosed transistor count. The transistor density for AMD is 109.1M per mm², while Intel's density is not recorded.

Ray tracing capabilities diverge sharply. The AMD card carries 70 ray tracing cores, while the Intel card has 32, a difference of more than 2x. This suggests the AMD architecture allocates substantially more silicon to ray tracing acceleration.

The AMD card's FP32 output of 45.25 TFLOPS is nearly double the Intel card's 22.94 TFLOPS. This roughly 2:1 ratio persists in FP16, with AMD at 90.50 TFLOPS versus Intel at 45.88 TFLOPS.

The Intel card compensates with higher clock speeds. Its 2800 MHz boost clock exceeds AMD's 2525 MHz by 275 MHz, and its base clock of 2280 MHz is 385 MHz higher than AMD's 1895 MHz. Higher clocks partially offset the lower compute unit count, but not enough to close the FP32 gap.

Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 608.0 GB/s, a 32.0 GB/s advantage over AMD's 576.0 GB/s. With identical memory capacity and bus width, this difference comes from the higher effective memory speed.

The Intel card supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This gives the Intel card twice the theoretical host interface bandwidth.

Production status also differs. The AMD card is marked as Active, while the Intel card has no production status recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins in compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 45.25 TFLOPS is 97% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B70's 22.94 TFLOPS. This advantage extends to FP16, where AMD delivers 90.50 TFLOPS versus 45.88 TFLOPS. For workloads that scale with raw shader throughput, such as simulation, rendering, and general compute, the AMD card holds a decisive edge.

The AMD card also wins in ray tracing core count, with 70 cores versus 32. This 2.2x advantage suggests the AMD architecture is better equipped for ray-traced workloads, though actual benchmark data for the Intel card is unavailable.

The AMD card has more shading units (4480 versus 4096) and more TMUs (280 versus 256), which supports its higher texture rate and compute output.

The Intel Arc Pro B70 wins in clock speeds. Its 2800 MHz boost clock and 2280 MHz base clock are higher than AMD's 2525 MHz and 1895 MHz respectively. For workloads sensitive to clock frequency rather than raw core count, the Intel card may hold an advantage, though this cannot be verified from benchmark data.

The Intel card wins in memory bandwidth at 608.0 GB/s, a 5.6% advantage over AMD's 576.0 GB/s. Applications that are bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound may benefit from this difference.

The Intel card wins in power efficiency per specification. It has a 230 W TDP versus AMD's 260 W, a 30 W difference, while delivering higher memory bandwidth and clock speeds. The single 8-pin power connector and 550 W suggested PSU also indicate lower system power requirements.

The Intel card wins in host interface bandwidth with PCIe 5.0 x16, which provides twice the theoretical throughput of AMD's PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. Workloads that transfer large datasets between host memory and GPU memory may benefit.

The Intel card is also physically smaller and lighter, at 267 mm versus 280 mm in length and 39 mm versus 40 mm in width.

For the AMD card, the recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 154,366 and Vulkan score of 175,422 confirm its compute capability in the 97th percentile. The Intel card has no recorded benchmarks, so its wins are limited to the specification sheet. The database cannot currently verify whether the Intel card's architectural advantages translate into real-world performance gains.