AMD Radeon PRO W7900D vs Intel Arc B370 Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains benchmark data for only one of the two parts in this comparison. The Intel Arc B370 has a single measured result in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, scoring 1184 points. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has no benchmark entries in the database, and therefore no head-to-head comparison can be made from recorded measurements. The Arc B370's score places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database, indicating that the vast majority of recorded graphics processors outperform it in this particular workload.

The Arc B370's nearest rivals in the database provide context for this score. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 posts an average score of 1186, which is 0.2% higher than the Arc B370. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 averages 1190, a 0.5% advantage. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M records 1192, sitting 0.7% above the Arc B370. On the opposite side, the AMD FirePro M2000 achieves 1168, which is 1.4% lower than the Arc B370's result. These deltas are small, clustering the Arc B370 within a narrow band of older and lower-tier discrete graphics solutions in this specific DirectX 12 test.

Without any recorded benchmark for the Radeon PRO W7900D, the database cannot confirm which part wins in any workload. The W7900D's theoretical specifications, however, suggest a dramatically different performance class. Its shading unit count of 6144 compares to 1280 on the Arc B370, a 4.8x difference in raw shader hardware. The pixel rate of 414.0 GPixel/s on the W7900D versus 48.00 GPixel/s on the Arc B370 represents an 8.6x gap. Texture rate similarly diverges: 827.9 GTexel/s against 96.00 GTexel/s, an 8.6x difference. The FP32 throughput of 52.99 TFLOPS on the AMD part versus 6.144 TFLOPS on the Intel part is an 8.6x disparity. These figures indicate that the W7900D operates in a completely different performance tier, but the absence of actual benchmark scores prevents a direct quantitative comparison.

# Architecture Differences

The two processors stem from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D uses the Navi 31 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc B370 uses the Panther Lake chip based on Xe3-LPG architecture and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. The W7900D is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, while the Arc B370 uses Intel's 3 nm node. The AMD part contains 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The Intel part's transistor count and die size are recorded as unknown in the database.

Memory architecture separates these parts decisively. The W7900D carries 48 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory across a 384-bit bus, delivering 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clocks run at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective transfer. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, with its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the Intel part has no dedicated VRAM and relies on the host system's memory subsystem, a fundamental difference in how each GPU accesses data.

Compute resources differ substantially. The W7900D has 6144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 render output units, and 96 ray tracing cores. The Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. The AMD part's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 52.99 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part achieves 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio relative to its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, indicating half-rate FP16 execution. Neither part lists tensor cores in the database.

Clock behavior also differs. The W7900D runs at a 1327 MHz base clock and 2156 MHz boost. The Arc B370 idles at a 300 MHz base but boosts to 2400 MHz, a higher maximum frequency despite its lower overall compute throughput. Power delivery reflects their positioning: the W7900D has a 295 W TDP with two 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested power supply, while the Arc B370 draws 25 W, uses no power connectors, and is integrated into a processor package as an IGP. The W7900D occupies a triple-slot form factor measuring 280 mm by 110 mm by 51 mm. The Arc B370 has no recorded dimensions.

API support is identical across both parts: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The W7900D connects via PCIe 4.0 x16 and outputs through three DisplayPort 2.1 ports plus one mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The Arc B370 uses an integrated graphics processor interface with display outputs described as portable device dependent.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has 6144 shading units, while the Intel Arc B370 has 1280 shading units. The AMD part provides 4.8 times the shader hardware of the Intel part.

Q: How does memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The W7900D uses 48 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, meaning its memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent rather than fixed specifications.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The W7900D has a 295 W TDP and requires two 8-pin power connectors with a 600 W suggested power supply. The Arc B370 has a 25 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested power supply listed, consistent with its integrated graphics processor design.

Q: Are the architectures related?

A: No. The W7900D uses AMD's RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito. The Arc B370 uses Intel's Xe3-LPG architecture with the Panther Lake chip. They also use different foundries and process nodes: TSMC 5 nm for AMD, Intel 3 nm for Intel.

Q: Which part supports newer display outputs?

A: The W7900D has three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and one mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The Arc B370's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning the database does not assign fixed display connectors to this integrated part.

Q: What benchmark data exists for each GPU?

A: The Arc B370 has one recorded benchmark: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. The W7900D has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its measured performance cannot be compared directly.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7900D | Intel Arc B370 |

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

| Chip | Navi 31 | Panther Lake |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe3-LPG |

| Process node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | Unknown |

| Die size | 529 mm² | Unknown |

| Base clock | 1327 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2156 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Memory size | 48 GB GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory bus | 384 bit | System Shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 864.0 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading units | 6144 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 384 | 40 |

| ROPs | 192 | 20 |

| Ray tracing cores | 96 | 10 |

| Pixel rate | 414.0 GPixel/s | 48.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 827.9 GTexel/s | 96.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 throughput | 52.99 TFLOPS | 6.144 TFLOPS |

| FP16 throughput | 52.99 TFLOPS (1:1) | 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 295 W | 25 W |

| Slot width | Triple-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | None listed |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display outputs | 3x DP 2.1, 1x mini-DP 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 280 x 110 x 51 mm | Not recorded |

| Release date | 2025-09-24 | 2026-01-26 |

| Benchmark percentile | No data | 5th percentile |

# Where Each One Wins

The data supports distinct conclusions for each part based on recorded specifications and the single benchmark result.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D wins decisively on raw compute capability. Its FP32 throughput of 52.99 TFLOPS is 8.6 times the Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS. The pixel rate of 414.0 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 827.9 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s represent the same 8.6x multiplier across all three throughput metrics. The 48 GB dedicated GDDR6 frame buffer with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth gives the W7900D a massive memory advantage over the Arc B370's system shared memory, whose bandwidth is system dependent. The W7900D's 384-bit bus versus a shared memory implementation means workloads that require large resident datasets, such as high-resolution rendering or multi-model compute tasks, will favor the AMD part. The W7900D also provides fixed DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, including three full-size and one mini connector, which suits workstation display configurations.

The Intel Arc B370 wins on efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is 270 W lower than the W7900D's 295 W TDP. It requires no power connectors and has no suggested power supply, fitting into portable devices as an integrated graphics processor. The 3 nm Intel process node is smaller than the 5 nm TSMC node used for the W7900D. The Arc B370's boost clock of 2400 MHz exceeds the W7900D's 2156 MHz boost, indicating a higher operating frequency despite far fewer compute resources. The Arc B370 also has a recorded benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while the W7900D has no measured results in the database. This means the Intel part has verified performance data, and its nearest rivals in the database (ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 at 1186, ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1190, AMD Radeon HD 7650M at 1192, AMD FirePro M2000 at 1168) bracket its score within a narrow 0.7% range above and 1.4% below.

The use-case split follows from these characteristics. The W7900D targets workloads that demand maximum throughput, large dedicated memory pools, and fixed multi-display outputs, where its 8.6x advantage in pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute can be fully utilized. The Arc B370 serves systems where power draw, physical footprint, and integration matter more than peak compute, as evidenced by its 25 W envelope and IGP classification. The database's percentile data reinforces this: the Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, while the W7900D has no percentile ranking due to absent benchmark records. Neither part has a recorded head-to-head benchmark win in the database, so all conclusions about relative performance derive from specification differences and the single Arc B370 benchmark score.