AMD Radeon RX 9070 vs Intel Arc B580 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 and Intel Arc B580 occupy very different tiers, and the benchmark data reflects that gap clearly. The RX 9070 wins 8 of 10 head-to-head tests, often by massive margins, while the Arc B580 scores two notable victories that reveal its unique strengths. The average benchmark scores place the RX 9070 at 23877 versus 23021 for the Arc B580, a relatively modest 3.7% aggregate difference that masks the enormous swings in individual tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive win for the AMD Radeon RX 9070 comes in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it scores 6290 against the Intel Arc B580's 3068. That is a 105% advantage, meaning the RX 9070 delivers more than double the performance in this modern DX12 workload. The PassMark DirectX 11 test shows a similar story, with the RX 9070 scoring 281 versus 128 for the Arc B580—a 119.5% lead. These are not close contests; they represent different performance classes entirely.

The RX 9070 also dominates compute-heavy workloads. In PassMark GPU Compute, it scores 14737 against 7729, a 90.7% advantage. Geekbench OpenCL shows 131539 for the RX 9070 versus 92821 for the Arc B580, a 41.7% lead. Legacy DirectX tests follow the same pattern: DirectX 10 sees the RX 9070 ahead by 85.5% (141 vs 76), and DirectX 9 shows an 87.4% gap (343 vs 183). Even the 2D test favors the RX 9070, with a PassMark G2D score of 1280 versus 709, an 80.5% difference.

The Intel Arc B580's two wins are worth examining closely. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 109672 crushes the RX 9070's 58705, a 46.5% margin in Intel's favor. This is a massive reversal from the OpenCL result and suggests the Arc B580's Vulkan driver stack is exceptionally well-optimized. The other win is narrow: PassMark DirectX 12 sees the Arc B580 score 76 against the RX 9070's 74, a 2.6% edge. While the RX 9070 dominates the overall picture, these two results show the Arc B580 is not without its own strengths.

Architecture Differences

The RX 9070 is built on TSMC's 4 nm process with the Navi 48 chip, part of the RDNA 4.0 architecture. It packs 53,900 million transistors into a 357 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The Arc B580 uses TSMC's 5 nm process with the BMG-G21 chip, based on Xe2-HPG architecture. It has 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, giving a density of 72.1M per mm². The RX 9070's newer process node and higher transistor density are clear advantages in raw compute potential.

The RX 9070 features 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 128 ROPs, alongside 56 ray tracing cores. The Arc B580 counters with 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 80 ROPs, and 20 ray tracing cores. These differences explain much of the performance gap: the RX 9070 has 40% more shading units and 75% more ROPs. The FP32 compute rating tells a similar story—36.13 TFLOPS for the RX 9070 versus 13.67 TFLOPS for the Arc B580. Interestingly, the Arc B580's FP16 rating of 27.34 TFLOPS is substantially higher than its FP32 figure, indicating a 2:1 ratio, while the RX 9070 lists FP16 at 36.13 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The RX 9070 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc B580 has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, with 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 9070's 41% bandwidth advantage matters in texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads. Clock speeds also differ: the RX 9070 boosts to 2520 MHz, while the Arc B580 runs at a fixed 2670 MHz base and boost. The Arc B580's higher clocks partially compensate for its lower core count, but not enough to close the compute gap.

Power and interface specifications show further divergence. The RX 9070 has a 220 W TDP and requires 2x 8-pin power connectors with a 550 W suggested PSU. The Arc B580 draws 190 W, uses a single 8-pin connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The RX 9070 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Arc B580 runs PCIe 4.0 x8. Both are dual-slot cards, and both support DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9070 is the clear choice for DirectX 11 and older API workloads. Its 119.5% lead in PassMark DirectX 11 and 87.4% lead in DirectX 9 indicate that it handles legacy titles with far more headroom. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result, with a 105% advantage, shows it also dominates modern DX12 games that stress the GPU heavily. Compute workloads are another stronghold: the 90.7% lead in PassMark GPU Compute and 41.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL make it suitable for rendering, simulation, and other GPU-accelerated tasks.

The Arc B580's Vulkan performance is its standout feature. The 46.5% lead over the RX 9070 in Geekbench Vulkan suggests that Vulkan-native games and applications will run disproportionately well on the Intel card. This is not a small margin; it indicates a fundamental strength in the Xe2-HPG architecture's Vulkan implementation. The narrow 2.6% win in PassMark DirectX 12 is less meaningful but still shows the Arc B580 is competitive in that specific benchmark.

For 2D workloads, the RX 9070 wins decisively with an 80.5% lead in PassMark G2D. This suggests better desktop compositing and 2D acceleration performance. The RX 9070 also has a higher percentile ranking at 69 versus 68 for the Arc B580, though both sit near the same tier relative to all GPUs. The nearest rivals data shows the RX 9070 trading blows with the RTX 3080 Mobile and RTX 2080 SUPER, while the Arc B580 sits near the RTX 2080 and RX 580 2048SP.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 9070 is the faster card in almost every measurable way. Its wins span DirectX 9 through DirectX 12, OpenCL, compute, and 2D workloads, with margins ranging from 41.7% to 119.5%. The only significant exception is Vulkan, where the Intel Arc B580 holds a 46.5% advantage. If your primary workload is Vulkan-based, the Arc B580 is not just competitive—it is superior.

For gamers and professionals using DirectX or OpenCL, the RX 9070 is the obvious pick. The 105% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 90.7% lead in GPU compute make it suitable for demanding modern games and compute tasks. The 16 GB memory capacity and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth provide more headroom for high-resolution textures and large datasets compared to the Arc B580's 12 GB and 456.0 GB/s.

The Arc B580 makes sense for specific use cases. Vulkan-centric applications, whether games or compute workloads, will benefit from its 109672 Geekbench Vulkan score. Its lower 190 W TDP and single 8-pin connector also make it easier to integrate into existing systems with smaller power supplies. However, the data shows it is not a general-purpose replacement for the RX 9070; it wins only 2 of 10 head-to-head tests.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 wins 8 of 10 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Arc B580 wins 2.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark DirectX 11, where the RX 9070 scores 281 versus 128 for the Arc B580, a 119.5% difference.

Q: Where does the Intel Arc B580 outperform the RX 9070?

A: The Arc B580 wins in Geekbench Vulkan (109672 vs 58705, a 46.5% lead) and narrowly in PassMark DirectX 12 (76 vs 74, a 2.6% edge).

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The RX 9070 has 644.6 GB/s bandwidth from 16 GB on a 256-bit bus, while the Arc B580 has 456.0 GB/s from 12 GB on a 192-bit bus.

Q: What are their FP32 compute ratings?

A: The RX 9070 delivers 36.13 TFLOPS FP32, while the Arc B580 delivers 13.67 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 9070 has 151.0M transistors per mm² (53,900 million total on 357 mm²), compared to the Arc B580's 72.1M per mm² (19,600 million on 272 mm²).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 9070 | Intel Arc B580 |

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

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 53,900 million | 19,600 million |

| Die Size | 357 mm² | 272 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 151.0M / mm² | 72.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1330 MHz | 2670 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2520 MHz | 2670 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 644.6 GB/s | 456.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3584 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 224 | 160 |

| ROPs | 128 | 80 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 56 | 20 |

| FP32 Performance | 36.13 TFLOPS | 13.67 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 36.13 TFLOPS (1:1) | 27.34 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 322.6 GPixel/s | 213.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 564.5 GTexel/s | 427.2 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 220 W | 190 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 272 mm x 115 mm x 45 mm |

| Launch MSRP | 549 USD | 249 USD |