Intel Arc 140T Mobile vs Intel Arc Pro B370 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core differences in the two Intel graphics processors?

A: The Intel Arc 140T Mobile is built on the Xe-LPG+ architecture with 1024 shading units, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture with 1280 shading units. The Arc 140T Mobile has 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs, whereas the Arc Pro B370 has 40 TMUs and 20 ROPs.

Q: How do their clock speeds compare?

A: Both have the same base clock of 300 MHz. The Arc Pro B370 boosts to 2400 MHz, slightly higher than the Arc 140T Mobile's boost of 2350 MHz.

Q: Which processor has the higher floating-point performance?

A: The Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS in FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS in FP16 (2:1), exceeding the Arc 140T Mobile's 4.813 TFLOPS FP32 and 9.626 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

Q: What are the manufacturing process differences?

A: The Arc 140T Mobile uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the Arc Pro B370 uses a 3 nm process fabricated by Intel.

Q: How do their power requirements differ?

A: The Arc 140T Mobile has a TDP of 35 W with no power connectors listed, while the Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W and explicitly lists "None" for power connectors.

Q: What is the release timeline for each?

A: The Arc 140T Mobile was released on January 12, 2025, and the Arc Pro B370 was released on January 26, 2026. Both are currently listed as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The two Intel graphics processors belong to different architectural generations. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile uses the Xe-LPG+ architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Pro B370 employs the newer Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel.

The shading unit count differs significantly: the Arc Pro B370 packs 1280 shading units versus 1024 on the Arc 140T Mobile. However, the texture and raster pipeline favors the mobile part. The Arc 140T Mobile has 64 texture mapping units and 32 raster operation units, while the Arc Pro B370 has 40 TMUs and 20 ROPs. This configuration leads to divergent throughput characteristics: the Arc 140T Mobile achieves a pixel rate of 75.20 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 150.4 GTexel/s, while the Arc Pro B370 reaches 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s respectively.

Ray tracing hardware also scales with the shading units. The Arc Pro B370 includes 10 ray tracing cores, compared to 8 on the Arc 140T Mobile. Both parts share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The chip names reveal different platform targets. The Arc 140T Mobile uses Arrow Lake-H, indicating a high-performance mobile chipset. The Arc Pro B370 uses Panther Lake, which appears in the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation. The process node difference, 5 nm TSMC versus 3 nm Intel, suggests the Pro B370 benefits from a denser manufacturing technology.

Memory configuration is identical in both cases: system shared memory, system shared type, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth. Neither has dedicated VRAM, making both dependent on the host system's memory subsystem.

The power envelope differs notably. The Arc 140T Mobile has a TDP of 35 W, while the Arc Pro B370 draws 25 W. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with portable device dependent display outputs. The Arc Pro B370 explicitly lists "None" for power connectors, whereas the Arc 140T Mobile leaves this field empty.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. Both entries show empty benchmark arrays, zero average benchmark scores, zero wins for each side, and no nearest rivals listed. The percentile ranking for both is 50 out of all GPUs, indicating a mid-tier position in the database distribution. Without measured scores, the analysis must rely on the architectural and specification data available.

The FP32 compute figures provide the clearest performance indicator. The Arc Pro B370 outputs 6.144 TFLOPS, which is approximately 27.7% higher than the Arc 140T Mobile's 4.813 TFLOPS. In FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, the Pro B370 reaches 12.29 TFLOPS versus 9.626 TFLOPS, a similar proportional advantage.

The pixel throughput reverses the ranking. The Arc 140T Mobile delivers 75.20 GPixel/s, exceeding the Arc Pro B370's 48.00 GPixel/s by roughly 56.7%. Texture fill rates follow the same pattern: 150.4 GTexel/s on the mobile part versus 96.00 GTexel/s on the Pro B370, a 56.7% difference as well.

The boost clock favors the Pro B370 at 2400 MHz, a 2.1% advantage over the 2350 MHz on the Arc 140T Mobile. This modest clock edge combines with the larger shading unit count to produce the compute lead, but the TMU and ROP deficit on the Pro B370 limits its fill-rate capabilities.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc 140T Mobile | Intel Arc Pro B370 |

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

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

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

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Boost Clock | 2350 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 64 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 20 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Pixel Rate | 75.20 GPixel/s | 48.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 150.4 GTexel/s | 96.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.813 TFLOPS | 6.144 TFLOPS |

| FP16 (2:1) | 9.626 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 35 W | 25 W |

| Power Connectors | (not listed) | None |

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

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-M | HD Graphics-WM |

The base clock is identical at 300 MHz on both. Memory specifications match exactly: system shared size, type, and bus width, with system dependent bandwidth. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has a listed launch MSRP, dimensions, or transistor data. Both use IGP slot width and bus interface. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both.

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct performance profiles. The Intel Arc Pro B370 leads in raw compute throughput, FP32 and FP16 performance, shading unit count, ray tracing core count, and offers a slightly higher boost clock. The Intel Arc 140T Mobile leads in pixel and texture fill rates, TMU and ROP counts, and operates at a higher TDP of 35 W versus 25 W.

The compute advantage of the Pro B370 is substantial. Its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 output represents a meaningful step above the 4.813 TFLOPS of the Arc 140T Mobile. Applications that stress general-purpose compute, shader-heavy workloads, or ray tracing would favor the Pro B370. The ray tracing core difference, 10 versus 8, reinforces this direction.

The fill-rate advantage of the Arc 140T Mobile suggests it handles resolution-dependent rendering tasks more efficiently. Its 75.20 GPixel/s pixel rate and 150.4 GTexel/s texture rate point to stronger performance in traditional rasterization scenarios where fill rates bound output. The higher TDP indicates the mobile part is designed to sustain more aggressive throughput in its specific pipeline stages.

Both parts share the same memory model, making them equally dependent on system memory bandwidth. Neither offers dedicated VRAM, so real-world performance will vary with the host platform's memory configuration. The system dependent bandwidth designation means the actual data rates are not fixed by the GPU alone.

The production status for both is Active, and both occupy the 50th percentile in the database's GPU ranking. This suggests neither is positioned as a top-tier part nor a low-end part; they sit at the mid-range of the performance distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc 140T Mobile wins in scenarios where pixel output and texture throughput dominate. Its 56.7% higher pixel rate and 56.7% higher texture rate compared to the Arc Pro B370 make it the stronger choice for fill-rate-bound workloads. These include traditional 3D rendering at fixed resolutions, certain image processing pipelines, and tasks that write many pixels per frame. The 32 ROPs versus 20 ROPs reinforce this strength, and the 64 TMUs compared to 40 provide a clear texture processing edge.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in compute-oriented tasks. Its 27.7% higher FP32 throughput and 27.7% higher FP16 throughput give it an edge in general-purpose GPU computing, physics simulations, machine learning inference, and other shader-heavy workloads. The 1280 shading units versus 1024 provide the parallel execution capacity, and the 10 ray tracing cores versus 8 offer additional headroom for ray-traced effects. The 3 nm process from Intel suggests efficiency improvements that allow this compute density within a 25 W envelope.

The power draw difference adds a practical dimension. The Arc Pro B370's 25 W TDP versus the Arc 140T Mobile's 35 W TDP means the Pro B370 delivers higher compute performance at lower power consumption. This efficiency gap could matter in thermally constrained portable devices where sustained load performance depends on cooling capacity.

For ray tracing specifically, the Pro B370's additional ray tracing cores and higher FP32 throughput position it ahead in workloads that combine ray tracing with compute shading. The Arc 140T Mobile's advantage remains in the rasterization pipeline, where its higher fill rates and ROP count can maintain throughput when geometry and texture sampling dominate the frame time.

The release date difference, January 2025 versus January 2026, shows the Pro B370 as a later part with a newer architecture generation. The predecessor names differ as well: HD Graphics-M for the Arc 140T Mobile and HD Graphics-WM for the Arc Pro B370, indicating separate product lineage within Intel's graphics lineup.