Intel Arc 130T Mobile vs Intel Arc B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc 130T Mobile and the Intel Arc B370. Instead, the database provides a single benchmark entry for the Arc B370, which allows for a comparative assessment against its nearest rivals, while the Arc 130T Mobile has no benchmark scores listed. This absence of direct measurement data makes a traditional win/loss comparison impossible from the current database entries.

For the Intel Arc B370, the sole recorded benchmark is 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), with a score of 1184. This places the B370 at the 5th percentile of all GPUs in the database, indicating that it sits in a very low performance tier relative to the broader GPU landscape. The nearest rivals in the database provide context for this score. The B370 trails the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 by 0.2%, as that rival scores 1186. It also falls behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770 by 0.5%, which scores 1190, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M by 0.7%, which scores 1192. Conversely, the B370 leads the AMD FirePro M2000 by 1.4%, as that rival scores 1168. These deltas are extremely narrow, with all four rivals falling within a 2.1% band of the B370's score, suggesting that the B370 delivers performance statistically comparable to these older, entry-level discrete and mobile GPUs.

The Arc 130T Mobile, despite being a newer product in the database, has no benchmark entries and thus no percentile ranking beyond a neutral 50th percentile placeholder, which carries no comparative weight. The lack of measured scores for the 130T means the database cannot confirm any performance advantage for either part in a head-to-head context. What the data does show is that the B370's measured performance is modest, clustering tightly with a set of legacy GPUs from the early 2010s. For the 130T, no such empirical anchor exists in the recorded data, so any performance claims would be speculative.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Arc B370 outperform the Intel Arc 130T Mobile in any recorded benchmark?

A: Yes, but only in the sense that the B370 has a recorded benchmark score while the 130T has none. The B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), placing it at the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The 130T has no benchmark entries in the database, so no direct comparison is possible.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its closest rivals in the database?

A: The B370's nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1186, a delta of -0.2% against the B370. The B370 also trails the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%) and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7%). It leads the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4%). All deltas are within a very narrow range.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU, and how does that affect their positioning?

A: The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has a TDP of 35 W, while the Intel Arc B370 has a TDP of 25 W. The B370 consumes 10 W less power, which is a significant difference for integrated graphics in portable devices, though the 130T offers a higher pixel rate and texture rate despite the higher power draw.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has 1280 shading units and 10 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has 896 shading units and 7 ray tracing cores. The B370 therefore offers 384 more shading units and 3 more RT cores, which aligns with its higher FP32 throughput.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile is built on a 5 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Arc B370 is built on a 3 nm process by Intel. The B370 uses a newer, denser node, which likely contributes to its lower TDP despite having more compute units.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has a boost clock of 2200 MHz, while the Intel Arc B370 has a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The B370 runs 200 MHz higher at boost, which partially explains its higher FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS versus 3.942 TFLOPS for the 130T.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile and the Intel Arc B370 represent two distinct architectural generations from Intel, despite both being classified under the Arc Graphics-M umbrella. The 130T is based on the Arrow Lake-H chip and uses the Xe-LPG+ architecture, while the B370 is based on the Panther Lake chip and employs the Xe3-LPG architecture. This generational jump is reflected in their respective process nodes: the 130T is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, whereas the B370 is produced on a 3 nm process at Intel. The shift from TSMC to Intel foundry services for the B370 marks a notable change in manufacturing strategy, and the 3 nm node allows for a higher transistor density, although the database does not provide specific transistor counts or die sizes for either part.

The compute configuration diverges significantly. The Arc 130T Mobile packs 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 28 raster output pipelines. In contrast, the Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. This means the 130T has a higher texture fill rate (123.2 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s) and a higher pixel rate (61.60 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s), despite having fewer shading units. The B370's advantage lies in raw shader throughput: its FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS, compared to 3.942 TFLOPS for the 130T, a 55.9% increase. Similarly, FP16 performance is 12.29 TFLOPS for the B370 versus 7.885 TFLOPS for the 130T, both using a 2:1 ratio. The B370 also has 10 ray tracing cores versus 7 on the 130T, improving its capacity for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Clock speeds differ as well. Both GPUs share a base clock of 300 MHz, but the B370 boosts to 2400 MHz, which is 200 MHz higher than the 130T's 2200 MHz boost. This higher boost clock, combined with the newer architecture and additional shading units, explains the B370's superior compute throughput. However, the 130T's higher TMU and ROP counts suggest that it may be better optimized for fill-rate-bound workloads, such as traditional rasterization at lower resolutions, even though it lacks the B370's raw shader power.

Memory configurations are identical in scope: both use system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and a system-shared bus width. Neither GPU has dedicated VRAM, making them dependent on the host system's memory subsystem. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with no slot width, no power connectors (the B370 explicitly lists "None"), and display outputs that are portable device dependent. The B370's lack of external power connectors aligns with its lower 25 W TDP, while the 130T's 35 W TDP may require more robust system cooling but still fits within an integrated design.

The API support is the same for both: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This ensures feature parity in modern graphics APIs, including ray tracing and mesh shaders, though the B370's additional RT cores give it a hardware advantage in those workloads. The production status for both is "Active," and neither has a successor listed. The 130T's predecessor is noted as "HD Graphics-M," while the B370 has no predecessor in the database.

The Verdict

The data in the database points to a clear, though nuanced, distinction between these two integrated GPUs. The Intel Arc B370, with its 3 nm Intel process, 1280 shading units, and 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, is the more compute-capable part on paper. Its 2400 MHz boost clock and 10 RT cores further underscore its architectural advantage. However, the only measured benchmark for the B370, a 1184 score in 3DMark Steel Nomad, places it at the 5th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all legacy parts from the ATI Radeon HD 5000/7000 and AMD FirePro families. This suggests that despite its modern architecture, the B370's real-world performance is modest, likely constrained by its 25 W power envelope and shared-memory design.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile has no benchmark scores in the database, so its performance cannot be empirically verified. What the data does show is that it has a higher TDP (35 W), a larger fill-rate capacity (61.60 GPixel/s and 123.2 GTexel/s), and more ROPs (28) than the B370. These characteristics could make the 130T more suitable for pixel-heavy rendering tasks, but its lower shading unit count (896) and FP32 throughput (3.942 TFLOPS) mean it will likely lag the B370 in general compute and shader-intensive games. Without recorded benchmarks, the database cannot confirm whether the 130T closes the gap in practice.

For users prioritizing raw compute and efficiency, the B370 is the better choice based on the recorded specifications, as it delivers higher FP32/F16 performance and more RT cores while drawing 10 W less power. Its lower TDP makes it a stronger candidate for thin-and-light portable devices where thermal headroom is scarce. Conversely, the 130T's higher fill rates and ROP count may favor it for older, rasterization-based titles or resolution scaling, but the lack of benchmark data leaves this as an unverified possibility. The database's percentile ranking for the B370 (5th percentile) should temper expectations: it is not a high-performance part by any stretch, and its benchmark score is nearly identical to that of a decade-old ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570. The 130T, with no scores, remains a wildcard.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ according to the database:

| Specification | Intel Arc 130T Mobile | Intel Arc B370 |

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

| Chip | Arrow Lake-H | Panther Lake |

| Architecture | Xe-LPG+ | Xe3-LPG |

| Generation | Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) | Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Shading Units | 896 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 56 | 40 |

| ROPs | 28 | 20 |

| RT Cores | 7 | 10 |

| Pixel Rate | 61.60 GPixel/s | 48.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 96.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.942 TFLOPS | 6.144 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) | 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 35 W | 25 W |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-01-26 |

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-M | Not listed |

The B370 is newer, built on a smaller node, and offers more shading units, higher clocks, and greater FP32/F16 throughput, but it sacrifices fill rates and ROPs compared to the 130T. The 130T also uses a different foundry (TSMC versus Intel) and has a higher TDP. Both share the same base clock (300 MHz), memory type (system shared), API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and slot type (IGP).