AMD Radeon RX 6550M vs Intel Arc B370 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M and the Intel Arc B370 represent two different approaches to integrated and low-power graphics. The RX 6550M is a discrete mobile GPU built on AMD’s RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution using Intel’s Xe3-LPG architecture. The benchmark data in the database shows a wide gap in measured performance, with the RX 6550M delivering substantially higher scores. This analysis covers the head-to-head results, architectural differences, and the specific use cases where each product has an advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two GPUs. Instead, the comparison relies on their average benchmark scores from separate test suites. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has an average benchmark score of 46702, while the Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. This is a difference of roughly 39.4 times in favor of the RX 6550M, a massive margin that places the two products in completely different performance classes.

The RX 6550M’s recorded benchmarks include a Geekbench OpenCL score of 42536 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 50867. These two results show strong compute performance across both API paths. The Vulkan score exceeds the OpenCL score by about 19.6 percent, suggesting the architecture is particularly effective under Vulkan workloads.

The Arc B370’s only recorded benchmark is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. This is a single test in a different benchmark suite, so direct cross-suite comparisons are not possible. However, the percentile data puts the two products at opposite ends of the performance distribution. The RX 6550M sits at the 85th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning it outperforms most recorded graphics processors. The Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile, indicating it lands near the bottom of the distribution.

The nearest rivals for the RX 6550M confirm its position. The Intel Arc A530M scores 46614, a performance difference of 0.2 percent. The AMD Radeon RX 5600M scores 46601, also 0.2 percent behind. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 46043, 1.4 percent behind, and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation scores 45972, 1.6 percent behind. These figures show the RX 6550M is tightly clustered with other mid-range mobile GPUs, all within a 1.6 percent band.

The Arc B370’s nearest rivals tell a different story. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, which is 0.2 percent ahead of the Arc B370. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5 percent ahead. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7 percent ahead. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4 percent behind. The Arc B370 is therefore clustered with older, low-end graphics hardware from more than a decade of product generations.

The performance gap between the two products is so large that no workload from the recorded data suggests the Arc B370 can compete with the RX 6550M on raw throughput. The RX 6550M’s average score is 39.4 times higher, and its percentile ranking is 80 points higher. The Arc B370’s nearest rivals are all legacy parts, while the RX 6550M’s nearest rivals are contemporary mobile GPUs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M uses the Navi 24 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture. It is manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process node. The die size is 107 mm² and contains 5,400 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The Intel Arc B370 uses the Panther Lake chip built on Xe3-LPG architecture. It is manufactured by Intel on a 3 nm process node. The transistor count and die size for the Arc B370 are listed as unknown in the database.

The RX 6550M features 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. It has 16 ray tracing cores. The Arc B370 features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. It has 10 ray tracing cores. The Arc B370 has more shading units by 25 percent, but fewer TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores.

Compute throughput figures reflect the different configurations. The RX 6550M delivers 5.816 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 11.63 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio. The Arc B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 12.29 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio. The Arc B370 is slightly ahead in raw shader math, about 5.6 percent higher in FP32. However, the RX 6550M has a large advantage in pixel and texture processing rates. The RX 6550M outputs 90.88 GPixel/s and 181.8 GTexel/s, while the Arc B370 outputs 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The RX 6550M is 89.3 percent faster in pixel rate and 89.4 percent faster in texture rate.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The RX 6550M has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 144.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 2250 MHz with an effective data rate of 18 Gbps. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, with the database listing size, type, and bus width as system dependent. Its bandwidth is also system dependent. This means the Arc B370 relies on the host system’s memory configuration, while the RX 6550M has its own dedicated VRAM with a fixed bandwidth figure.

Clock speeds show different operating characteristics. The RX 6550M has a base clock of 2000 MHz, a game clock of 2560 MHz, and a boost clock of 2840 MHz. The Arc B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The RX 6550M’s boost clock is 18.3 percent higher, and its base clock is much higher relative to the Arc B370’s idle-oriented base figure.

Power consumption differs dramatically. The RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W. The Arc B370 has a TDP of 25 W. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, which is expected for the Arc B370’s integrated design. The RX 6550M’s 80 W TDP is 3.2 times higher than the Arc B370’s 25 W figure, which explains part of the performance difference.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has tensor cores listed. The RX 6550M uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 bus interface, while the Arc B370 uses an IGP bus interface. Both have portable device dependent display outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has an average benchmark score of 46702, while the Intel Arc B370 has an average score of 1184. The RX 6550M’s score is 39.4 times higher.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W, while the Arc B370 has a TDP of 25 W. The Arc B370 consumes 68.75 percent less power according to the recorded TDP figures.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU in the database?

A: The RX 6550M’s nearest rival is the Intel Arc A530M with an average score of 46614, a 0.2 percent difference. The Arc B370’s nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with an average score of 1186, a 0.2 percent difference.

Q: Does the Arc B370 have any advantage in shader count?

A: Yes. The Arc B370 has 1280 shading units compared to 1024 on the RX 6550M, a 25 percent higher count. It also has slightly higher FP32 throughput at 6.144 TFLOPS versus 5.816 TFLOPS.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The RX 6550M uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, with size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The RX 6550M’s Navi 24 chip is built on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The Arc B370’s Panther Lake chip is built on a 3 nm process by Intel.

The Verdict

The recorded data clearly separates these two products into different market segments. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M delivers an average benchmark score of 46702 and sits at the 85th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are contemporary mobile graphics processors like the Intel Arc A530M and AMD Radeon RX 5600M, all within 1.6 percent of its score. This is a mid-range mobile GPU with competitive performance for its class.

The Intel Arc B370 delivers an average benchmark score of 1184 and sits at the 5th percentile. Its nearest rivals are decades-old parts like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 and ATI Radeon HD 5770. The performance gap between the Arc B370 and these legacy parts is small, ranging from 0.2 to 1.4 percent. This places the Arc B370 in the low-end integrated graphics category.

The RX 6550M is the clear choice for any workload requiring meaningful graphics performance. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth, higher pixel and texture rates, and higher boost clock all contribute to its dominant position in the benchmark data. The Arc B370’s advantages are limited to power efficiency, a smaller process node, and a higher shader count that does not translate into higher measured performance.

The Arc B370 is suited only for basic graphics tasks where the 25 W TDP is the primary constraint. Its system shared memory and IGP bus interface mean its performance depends heavily on the host platform. The data shows no scenario where the Arc B370 comes close to the RX 6550M in measured throughput.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products in the database records.

• Manufacturer: AMD versus Intel
• Chip: Navi 24 versus Panther Lake
• Architecture: RDNA 2.0 versus Xe3-LPG
• Generation: Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) versus Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake)
• Process Node: 6 nm versus 3 nm
• Foundry: TSMC versus Intel
• Transistors: 5,400 million versus unknown
• Die Size: 107 mm² versus unknown
• Transistor Density: 50.5M / mm² versus null
• Base Clock: 2000 MHz versus 300 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2840 MHz versus 2400 MHz
• Game Clock: 2560 MHz versus null
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz / 18 Gbps effective versus system shared
• Memory Size: 4 GB versus system shared
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus system shared
• Memory Bus Width: 64 bit versus system shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 144.0 GB/s versus system dependent
• Shading Units: 1024 versus 1280
• TMUs: 64 versus 40
• ROPs: 32 versus 20
• Ray Tracing Cores: 16 versus 10
• Pixel Rate: 90.88 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 181.8 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 5.816 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 80 W versus 25 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x4 versus IGP
• Release Date: 2023-01-03 versus 2026-01-26
• Predecessor: Polaris Mobile versus null
• Average Benchmark Score: 46702 versus 1184
• Percentile vs All GPUs: 85 versus 5

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M wins in every measured performance category except raw shader count and FP32 compute throughput. It has higher pixel rate, higher texture rate, more TMUs, more ROPs, more ray tracing cores, dedicated memory, higher memory bandwidth, a higher boost clock, and a much higher average benchmark score. Its percentile ranking of 85 versus 5 means it outperforms a far greater share of the GPU population. The RX 6550M is the appropriate choice for gaming, content creation, and any graphics workload that benefits from dedicated VRAM and high fill rates.

The Intel Arc B370 wins in power efficiency, with a TDP of 25 W versus 80 W. It also has a more advanced process node at 3 nm versus 6 nm, 25 percent more shading units, and slightly higher FP32 and FP16 compute rates. Its system shared memory design means it does not require dedicated VRAM allocation. The Arc B370 is appropriate for ultra-low-power systems where the 25 W TDP is a hard constraint and where measured benchmark performance is not the primary objective. The data shows the Arc B370’s advantages are architectural and power related, not performance related.