Intel Arc B370 vs Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc B370 and the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile are both integrated graphics solutions built on the Panther Lake chip and the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process. The data shows two very different performance tiers. The Arc B370 records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark score in the database, and its percentile ranking of 50 is a placeholder rather than a measured result. The Arc B370 is the clear performance leader, with 1280 shading units versus 512, 40 texture mapping units versus 32, and 20 raster output pipelines versus 16. It also delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against 2.355 TFLOPS for the smaller part. The Arc B370 should be the choice for any workload where rendering throughput matters. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile is a lower-spec variant for systems that need basic graphics capability with the same 25 W TDP envelope. The Arc B370 sits within 0.7% of the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 in average score, while the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no direct rival data to establish a comparable position.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc B370 wins in raw graphics throughput. Its FP32 output of 6.144 TFLOPS is roughly 2.6 times the 2.355 TFLOPS of the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. Pixel fill rate favors the Arc B370 at 48.00 GPixel/s against 36.80 GPixel/s, a 30% advantage. Texture fill rate shows a similar gap: 96.00 GTexel/s versus 73.60 GTexel/s, about 30% higher. The Arc B370 also doubles ray tracing core count, with 10 RT cores versus 4. Its boost clock of 2400 MHz is 100 MHz higher than the 2300 MHz boost on the smaller part. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile does not win any measured benchmark, and no head-to-head benchmark entries exist in the database. The smaller part's only distinguishing trait is its lower shading unit count, which implies lower complexity, but the database does not record any performance advantage from that. For any application that uses the recorded metrics, the Arc B370 is the stronger choice.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same Panther Lake chip, the Xe3-LPG architecture, and the 3 nm process node from Intel. Both are integrated graphics processors with an IGP slot width, no power connectors, and a 25 W TDP. Both use system shared memory, with memory type, bus width, and bandwidth listed as system dependent. Their API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The base clock is also the same at 300 MHz. The differences appear in the execution resources. The Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 RT cores. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile halves the shading units to 512, reduces TMUs to 32, ROPs to 16, and RT cores to 4. This configuration directly drives the FP32 and FP16 throughput differences, with the Arc B370 producing 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) versus 4.710 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) for the smaller part. Both parts are listed as Active in production status and share a release date of 2026-01-26. The FP16 figures are derived from the FP32 numbers at a 2:1 ratio, which is a standard architectural feature of the Xe3-LPG design. The memory subsystem is identical in type and dependency on the host system, so neither part gains a bandwidth advantage from its own configuration.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc B370 boosts to 2400 MHz, while the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile boosts to 2300 MHz. Both have a base clock of 300 MHz.

Q: Are these two GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: Yes. Both use the Xe3-LPG architecture, the Panther Lake chip, and Intel's 3 nm process node.

Q: How much faster is the Arc B370 in pixel fill rate?

A: The Arc B370 achieves 48.00 GPixel/s compared to 36.80 GPixel/s for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile, a 30% advantage.

Q: Do the two GPUs support different graphics APIs?

A: No. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: Both the Intel Arc B370 and the Intel Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile have a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Does the database record any benchmark score for the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile?

A: No. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no recorded benchmark entries, while the Arc B370 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two parts. However, the recorded specification data and the single benchmark for the Arc B370 allow a quantitative comparison. The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which places it near a cluster of older discrete GPUs. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 averages 1186, just 0.2% above the Arc B370. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 averages 1190, 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M averages 1192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 averages 1168, which is 1.4% below the Arc B370. These deltas show the Arc B370 performing within a narrow band around these four rivals, essentially at parity with a decade-old mainstream discrete card. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile has no score, so it cannot be placed against any rival.

Compute throughput offers the clearest separation. The Arc B370's FP32 rate of 6.144 TFLOPS is more than two and a half times the 2.355 TFLOPS of the Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile. FP16 follows the same pattern, with 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 4.710 TFLOPS (2:1). Texture rate favors the Arc B370 by 96.00 GTexel/s against 73.60 GTexel/s, a difference of about 30%. Pixel rate favors the Arc B370 by 48.00 GPixel/s against 36.80 GPixel/s, also about 30%. The shading unit count of 1280 versus 512 explains the compute gap, while the TMU and ROP counts of 40/20 versus 32/16 explain the fill rate gaps. Ray tracing resources also differ, with 10 RT cores on the Arc B370 versus 4 on the smaller part, suggesting a substantial difference in ray-traced workload capability, though no dedicated ray tracing benchmark appears in the database.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result is the only measured performance data point in the entire comparison. It belongs exclusively to the Arc B370. The Arc Graphics 4 Xe Mobile's absence from the benchmark table means the database cannot confirm its real-world performance. Its percentile value of 50 is not tied to any test result and should not be read as a performance ranking. The Arc B370's 5th percentile placement across all GPUs indicates it sits in the lower end of the overall performance distribution, but it remains far ahead of the smaller integrated part based on the architectural resource counts. The 25 W TDP shared by both parts means the Arc B370 delivers its higher throughput within the same power budget, which is a notable efficiency characteristic of the Xe3-LPG design on the 3 nm node. The identical memory configuration, system shared with system dependent bandwidth, removes memory as a differentiator between the two. All observed performance differences trace back to the execution unit counts and clock speeds within the GPU cores themselves.