AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the Intel Arc B770 are two very different graphics processors, one aimed at ultra-mobile, low-power integration and the other at traditional desktop performance. The recorded data shows a clear separation in their capabilities, with the Arc B770 dominating in raw throughput while the Z2 Go offers a dramatically lower power draw. This analysis walks through the benchmark data, architectural differences, and specification gaps to clarify what each part delivers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of zero in the current record. However, the specification data and computed rates provide a clear basis for comparison. The most telling divergence appears in the raw compute metrics. The Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU produces 4.147 TFLOPS. This puts the Arc B770 approximately 4.7 times ahead in single-precision floating-point throughput. For FP16, the Arc B770 reaches 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) versus the Z2 Go’s 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1), again a ratio of roughly 4.7 to 1.

The memory subsystem shows an even larger gap. The Arc B770 has a 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, compared to the Z2 Go’s 102.4 GB/s. That is exactly five times the bandwidth, a critical factor for texture-heavy workloads and high-resolution rendering. The Arc B770’s memory bus is 256 bit wide versus 128 bit, and it uses GDDR6 memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the Z2 Go uses LPDDR5 at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). The fill rates follow the same pattern. The Arc B770 achieves 307.2 GPixel/s and 614.4 GTexel/s, while the Z2 Go manages 86.40 GPixel/s and 129.6 GTexel/s. The Arc B770 is about 3.6 times faster in pixel throughput and 4.7 times faster in texture throughput.

The shading resources are overwhelmingly in the Arc B770’s favor. It contains 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. The Z2 Go has only 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This translates to a 5.3:1 ratio in shading units, 5.3:1 in TMUs, and 4:1 in ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also differs, with the Arc B770 carrying 32 RT cores versus 12 on the Z2 Go. While no direct ray tracing benchmark scores exist in the database, the hardware count alone suggests a substantial advantage for the Intel part in RT workloads.

The core clock speeds present a nuanced picture. The Z2 Go has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz, while the Arc B770 runs at a base of 2100 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. The Z2 Go’s boost clock is 300 MHz higher, but the Arc B770’s base clock is 1300 MHz higher. This means the Intel GPU maintains a much higher floor for sustained performance, whereas the AMD part relies on a high boost state that likely cannot be sustained given its 28 W power envelope. The Arc B770’s 225 W TDP is eight times higher than the Z2 Go’s 28 W, which explains the massive performance differential.

The Verdict

The data unambiguously shows the Intel Arc B770 as the superior performer in every compute and memory metric recorded. It leads by a factor of 4.7 in FP32 and FP16 throughput, five times in memory bandwidth, and roughly 3.6 to 4.7 times in fill rates. The Arc B770 also has more than five times the shading units, more than five times the TMUs, four times the ROPs, and nearly three times the RT cores. For any workload that stresses raw GPU throughput, the Arc B770 is the clear choice.

However, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU holds a decisive advantage in power consumption. Its 28 W TDP is a fraction of the Arc B770’s 225 W TDP. The Z2 Go requires no power connectors and no suggested PSU, while the Arc B770 needs a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. The Z2 Go also has a smaller die size at 208 mm² versus 368 mm², and it is built on a 6 nm process versus the Arc B770’s 5 nm node. The Z2 Go is an active production part with a release date of 2024-12-31, while the Arc B770 has a release date of 2025-12-31.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the Arc B770 is for systems where maximum performance is the priority and power delivery is not a constraint. The Z2 Go is for compact, low-power devices where efficiency and thermal limits dominate. Neither part can substitute for the other in their intended environments.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B770 wins in every category of raw computational performance. Its 4096 shading units and 19.66 TFLOPS make it suitable for demanding rendering tasks, high-resolution gaming, and compute-heavy applications. The 512.0 GB/s bandwidth and 256 bit bus allow it to feed those shading units effectively, avoiding bottlenecks in large texture sets or high-detail scenes. The 32 RT cores provide a path for hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature that the Z2 Go’s 12 RT cores cannot match. The Arc B770’s dual-slot design, PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1) position it as a standard desktop add-in card.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 28 W TDP allows it to operate without any external power connectors, and its single USB Type-C display output suggests a compact, embedded or handheld form factor. The Z2 Go’s 6 nm process and 208 mm² die size contribute to a lower thermal footprint. It also has a higher boost clock (2700 MHz) than the Arc B770 (2400 MHz), which indicates that in short bursts, the Z2 Go can reach a relatively high frequency despite its low power budget. The Z2 Go uses LPDDR5 memory, which is typically soldered onto the board, further reducing space requirements.

For memory capacity, both parts offer 16 GB, but the type and bandwidth differ dramatically. The Z2 Go’s 102.4 GB/s is sufficient for light workloads, while the Arc B770’s 512.0 GB/s is necessary for its higher throughput. The Z2 Go also has a smaller transistor count at 13,100 million versus the Arc B770’s unknown transistor count, but the Arc B770’s larger die size (368 mm²) indicates a more complex chip.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS, which is approximately 4.7 times the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU’s 4.147 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The Arc B770 has 512.0 GB/s, while the Z2 Go has 102.4 GB/s. The Arc B770’s bandwidth is exactly five times higher.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Z2 Go has a TDP of 28 W, and the Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W. The Arc B770 also requires a 550 W suggested PSU, while the Z2 Go has no power connector requirement.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 in the database.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Arc B770 has 4096 shading units, while the Z2 Go has 768. This is a 5.3:1 ratio in favor of Intel.

Q: What are the memory types and bus widths?

A: The Arc B770 uses 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, while the Z2 Go uses 16 GB LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is based on the Rembrandt+ chip using the RDNA 2.0 architecture. It is classified as a Console GPU in the AMD generation and is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The die size is 208 mm² with 13,100 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 63.0M per mm². The architecture includes 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. It uses a unified memory design with LPDDR5, which is common in integrated or semi-integrated solutions.

The Intel Arc B770 is built on the BMG-G31 chip using the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation. It uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 368 mm². The transistor count is listed as unknown, and no transistor density is recorded. The architecture includes 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 RT cores. It uses GDDR6 memory, which is a discrete memory configuration typical of standalone graphics cards.

Both architectures support the same API levels: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. However, the underlying hardware implementations differ significantly. RDNA 2.0 is an older architecture, while Xe2-HPG is Intel’s second-generation high-performance graphics architecture. The Arc B770’s predecessor is listed as Alchemist, indicating it is part of a direct lineage of Intel discrete GPUs. The Z2 Go has no predecessor or successor listed.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: AMD Rembrandt+ vs Intel BMG-G31
• Architecture: RDNA 2.0 vs Xe2-HPG
• Generation: Console GPU (AMD) vs Battlemage (Arc 7)
• Process Node: 6 nm vs 5 nm
• Transistors: 13,100 million vs unknown
• Die Size: 208 mm² vs 368 mm²
• Transistor Density: 63.0M / mm² vs null
• Base Clock: 800 MHz vs 2100 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2700 MHz vs 2400 MHz
• Memory Clock: 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective vs 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective
• Memory Type: LPDDR5 vs GDDR6
• Bus Width: 128 bit vs 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 102.4 GB/s vs 512.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 768 vs 4096
• TMUs: 48 vs 256
• ROPs: 32 vs 128
• RT Cores: 12 vs 32
• Pixel Rate: 86.40 GPixel/s vs 307.2 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 129.6 GTexel/s vs 614.4 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 4.147 TFLOPS vs 19.66 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 28 W vs 225 W
• Slot Width: null vs Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: null vs 550 W
• Bus Interface: null vs PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 1x USB Type-C vs 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1
• Release Date: 2024-12-31 vs 2025-12-31
• Production Status: Active vs null
• Predecessor: null vs Alchemist

The shared specifications include 16 GB memory size, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and a lack of tensor cores. Both are manufactured by different companies, AMD and Intel, and both have a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs in the database.