AMD Radeon PRO W7900D vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

AMD Radeon PRO W7900D and Intel Arc B770 represent two distinct approaches to high-performance graphics, with the data showing a clear separation in target workloads and hardware priorities. The AMD card is positioned for maximum compute throughput and large memory allocations, while the Intel card focuses on higher clock speeds and efficiency within a smaller physical footprint.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is the choice for workloads demanding massive memory capacity and raw FP32 compute. Its 48 GB GDDR6 frame buffer and 52.99 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are unmatched by the Intel Arc B770, which delivers 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 16 GB GDDR6. The AMD card’s memory bandwidth of 864.0 GB/s is a 68.8% advantage over the Intel card’s 512.0 GB/s. For rendering large scenes, training AI models in FP32, or processing high-resolution textures, the W7900D’s data path provides a decisive edge.

The Intel Arc B770 is the more balanced option for power-constrained environments. Its 225 W TDP is 70 W lower than the AMD card’s 295 W TDP, and its dual-slot design occupies less space than the triple-slot AMD cooler. The Arc B770 also boosts to 2400 MHz, 244 MHz higher than the W7900D’s 2156 MHz boost clock, which helps close the gap in latency-sensitive tasks. The 2:1 FP16 ratio on the Intel card, delivering 39.32 TFLOPS, indicates that mixed-precision workloads may see better throughput relative to its FP32 capability.

The data suggests that a workstation with a 600 W power supply requirement and triple-slot clearance is built for the W7900D. A system with a 550 W PSU recommendation and dual-slot requirements aligns with the Arc B770. Both cards support PCIe 4.0 x16 and the same API feature set, so platform compatibility is not a differentiator.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is built on the Navi 31 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the Plum Bonito codename. The Intel Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip with Xe2-HPG architecture from the Battlemage generation. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, so the transistor density differences come from chip design rather than manufacturing node.

The AMD chip contains 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The Intel chip has an unknown transistor count but occupies a 368 mm² die. The AMD die is 43.8% larger, which aligns with its higher shading unit count. The W7900D features 6144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, and 192 render output units. The Arc B770 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, exactly two-thirds of the AMD counts in each category.

Ray tracing hardware differs substantially. The AMD card includes 96 ray tracing cores, while the Intel card has 32. This 3:1 ratio suggests the AMD architecture allocates more silicon to RT workloads. Neither card features dedicated tensor cores in the recorded data.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The W7900D uses a 384-bit bus with 48 GB GDDR6 at 18 Gbps effective, producing 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc B770 uses a 256-bit bus with 16 GB GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, producing 512.0 GB/s. The AMD card’s memory clock runs at 2250 MHz, while the Intel card runs at 2000 MHz.

Power delivery configurations also differ. The AMD card requires two 8-pin connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. The Intel card uses one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector with a 550 W suggested PSU. The AMD card’s triple-slot cooler measures 280 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 51 mm in width. The Intel card is dual-slot, and its dimensions are not recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores between these two cards. Both have an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile score of 50 when compared against all GPUs in the database. The nearest rivals lists are empty for both products, meaning there is no comparative performance data from third-party measurements to reference.

Without measured benchmark results, the specification data serves as the only basis for performance analysis. The FP32 throughput difference is the clearest indicator: the AMD card delivers 52.99 TFLOPS, which is 2.7 times the Intel card’s 19.66 TFLOPS. This ratio matches the shading unit count ratio exactly, suggesting that both architectures achieve similar per-shader efficiency at their respective clock speeds.

The texture and pixel fill rates follow the same pattern. The AMD card’s texture rate is 827.9 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s for the Intel card, a 34.8% advantage. The pixel rate is 414.0 GPixel/s versus 307.2 GPixel/s, a 34.8% advantage as well. These ratios are lower than the FP32 ratio because the Intel card’s higher boost clock partially compensates for its lower unit counts.

The FP16 data reveals an architectural philosophical difference. The AMD card delivers 52.99 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it processes half-precision at the same rate as full precision. The Intel card delivers 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it processes half-precision at twice the FP32 rate. For FP16 workloads, the Intel card is 34.8% faster in raw throughput despite being 2.7 times slower in FP32. This is a significant consideration for machine learning inference or shader workloads that use half-precision math.

The memory bandwidth gap of 68.8% in favor of AMD reinforces its position for bandwidth-bound workloads. The Intel card’s 512.0 GB/s is sufficient for its 16 GB frame buffer, but the AMD card can feed its 48 GB capacity more quickly.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows the following fields where the two cards differ:

• Chip: Navi 31 versus BMG-G31
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus Xe2-HPG
• Codename: Plum Bonito versus not recorded
• Generation: Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) versus Battlemage (Arc 7)
• Transistors: 57,700 million versus unknown
• Die size: 529 mm² versus 368 mm²
• Transistor density: 109.1M / mm² versus not recorded
• Base clock: 1327 MHz versus 2100 MHz
• Boost clock: 2156 MHz versus 2400 MHz
• Memory clock: 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective versus 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective
• Memory size: 48 GB versus 16 GB
• Memory bus width: 384 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 864.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 6144 versus 4096
• TMUs: 384 versus 256
• ROPs: 192 versus 128
• RT cores: 96 versus 32
• FP32: 52.99 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS
• FP16: 52.99 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1)
• Pixel rate: 414.0 GPixel/s versus 307.2 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 827.9 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s
• TDP: 295 W versus 225 W
• Slot width: Triple-slot versus Dual-slot
• Power connectors: 2x 8-pin versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 600 W versus 550 W
• Display outputs: 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 versus 1x HDMI 2.1a plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1
• Dimensions: 280 mm length, 110 mm height, 51 mm width versus not recorded
• Release date: 2025-09-24 versus 2025-12-31
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega versus Alchemist

Fields where the cards match: process node (5 nm), foundry (TSMC), memory type (GDDR6), bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x16), DirectX support (12 Ultimate 12_2), OpenGL support (4.6), Vulkan support (1.4), production status (Active for AMD, not recorded for Intel), and launch MSRP (not recorded for either).

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS FP32, which is 2.7 times the Intel Arc B770’s 19.66 TFLOPS. The AMD card also has 6144 shading units versus 4096 on the Intel card.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The AMD card has 48 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card has 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card provides 68.8% more bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel card have any performance advantage?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc B770 processes FP16 at 39.32 TFLOPS, which is 34.8% higher than the AMD card’s 52.99 TFLOPS FP16 output. The Intel card also boosts to 2400 MHz versus 2156 MHz on the AMD card, and its 225 W TDP is 70 W lower than the AMD card’s 295 W TDP.

Q: What are the power supply requirements?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D requires a 600 W suggested PSU and two 8-pin power connectors. The Intel Arc B770 requires a 550 W suggested PSU and one 6-pin plus one 8-pin power connector.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface.

Q: How do the display outputs differ?

A: The AMD card provides 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The Intel card provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The Intel card is the only one of the two with an HDMI output.