Intel Arc B370 vs NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the benchmark score of the Intel Arc B370 in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 records a single benchmark score of 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its average benchmark score is also 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The Arc B370’s average score of 1184 is 0.2% behind the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: What is the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB’s benchmark score?

A: The database lists no benchmark entries for the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile vs all GPUs is 50.

Q: What are the key architectural differences between the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process, while the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB uses the Hopper architecture on a 5 nm process. The Intel chip is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), whereas the NVIDIA unit is an SXM module with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc B370 uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB has 141 GB of HBM3e memory on a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB delivers 66.91 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc B370 provides 6.144 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA unit is substantially ahead in raw floating-point performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs belong to entirely different product categories. The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution built on the Panther Lake chip, using the Xe3-LPG architecture. It is fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB is a dedicated server accelerator based on the GH100 chip, using the Hopper architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA chip contains 80,000 million transistors on a 814 mm² die, with a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The Intel chip’s transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

The Intel Arc B370 integrates 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 raster output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB has 16896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 528 tensor cores. The NVIDIA unit does not list dedicated ray tracing cores, while the Intel part does. The NVIDIA accelerator’s texture rate is 1,045.4 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s for the Intel part, a significant gap. Pixel rates are close: 47.52 GPixel/s for NVIDIA and 48.00 GPixel/s for Intel.

The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB supports no display outputs, aligning with its server role. The Intel Arc B370’s display outputs are described as portable device dependent, consistent with an integrated processor. API support also differs sharply: the Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA unit lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating the database records no consumer graphics API support for this server-focused accelerator.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Arc B370 and the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB. The head-to-head results are empty, and each product records zero wins in direct comparison. The only benchmark available for either product is the Intel Arc B370’s single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184.

Given the absence of head-to-head data, the comparison relies on the individual recorded specifications and the Intel part’s benchmark placement. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB has no benchmark scores in the database, so its percentile of 50 is a placeholder rather than a measured result. The Intel Arc B370’s 5th percentile is derived from its measured 1184 score.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Arc B370 illustrate its performance tier. Its score of 1184 sits within 0.7% of three older ATI and AMD parts, and 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000. These deltas are small, indicating the Arc B370 lands in a tightly clustered performance band among low-end historical GPUs. No comparable rivals are listed for the NVIDIA unit, which reflects its distinct market position as a high-end server accelerator without adjacent database entries.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc B370 and the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB:

• Process node: Intel uses 3 nm; NVIDIA uses 5 nm.
• Foundry: Intel fabricates its chip in-house; NVIDIA uses TSMC.
• Transistors: Intel lists unknown; NVIDIA lists 80,000 million.
• Die size: Intel lists unknown; NVIDIA lists 814 mm².
• Transistor density: Intel lists null; NVIDIA lists 98.3M / mm².
• Base clock: Intel at 300 MHz; NVIDIA at 1500 MHz.
• Boost clock: Intel at 2400 MHz; NVIDIA at 1980 MHz.
• Memory clock: Intel uses system shared; NVIDIA at 1593 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective.
• Memory size: Intel system shared; NVIDIA 141 GB.
• Memory type: Intel system shared; NVIDIA HBM3e.
• Memory bus width: Intel system shared; NVIDIA 6144 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: Intel system dependent; NVIDIA 4.89 TB/s.
• Shading units: Intel 1280; NVIDIA 16896.
• TMUs: Intel 40; NVIDIA 528.
• ROPs: Intel 20; NVIDIA 24.
• Ray tracing cores: Intel 10; NVIDIA none listed.
• Tensor cores: Intel none listed; NVIDIA 528.
• Texture rate: Intel 96.00 GTexel/s; NVIDIA 1,045.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Intel 6.144 TFLOPS; NVIDIA 66.91 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Intel 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA 133.8 TFLOPS (2:1).
• TDP: Intel 25 W; NVIDIA 700 W.
• Slot width: Intel IGP; NVIDIA SXM Module.
• Power connectors: Intel none; NVIDIA 8-pin EPS.
• Suggested PSU: Intel null; NVIDIA 1100 W.
• Bus interface: Intel IGP; NVIDIA PCIe 5.0 x16.
• Display outputs: Intel portable device dependent; NVIDIA no outputs.
• API support: Intel DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4; NVIDIA N/A for all.
• Release date: Intel 2026-01-26; NVIDIA 2024-11-17.
• Predecessor: Intel null; NVIDIA Server Ada.
• Successor: Intel null; NVIDIA Server Blackwell.
• Benchmark score: Intel 1184; NVIDIA none.
• Percentile: Intel 5; NVIDIA 50.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B370 wins in the areas of integrated graphics practicality and consumer feature support. It carries a 25 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and uses system shared memory, which suits portable devices. Its API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, allowing it to run consumer graphics workloads. Its pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s edges out the NVIDIA unit’s 47.52 GPixel/s. The Intel part also has a higher boost clock at 2400 MHz versus 1980 MHz, and it includes 10 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA accelerator lacks in its listed specifications.

The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB wins decisively in raw compute and memory capacity. Its FP32 throughput of 66.91 TFLOPS is over ten times the Intel part’s 6.144 TFLOPS. FP16 performance reaches 133.8 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS. The 141 GB HBM3e memory with 4.89 TB/s bandwidth dwarfs the system shared memory of the Intel chip. The NVIDIA unit’s 16896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 528 tensor cores provide a massively higher parallel processing capability. Its texture rate of 1,045.4 GTexel/s is more than ten times the Intel figure. The NVIDIA accelerator also uses a 6144-bit memory bus, and its base clock of 1500 MHz exceeds the Intel base clock of 300 MHz.

The NVIDIA unit’s server orientation is clear from its SXM module form factor, PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, and lack of display outputs. Its 700 W TDP and 8-pin EPS power connector, with a suggested PSU of 1100 W, indicate a data center deployment scenario. The Intel part’s integrated nature and portable device dependent outputs point toward mobile or embedded systems.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two products with fundamentally different purposes. The Intel Arc B370 is a low-power integrated GPU with a measured 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, all within 1.4% of its score, confirm this entry-level positioning. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB has no recorded benchmark scores, so its percentile of 50 reflects a default database value rather than measured performance.

For consumers seeking a GPU for portable devices with consumer API support, the Intel Arc B370 is the only option with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan compatibility. Its 25 W TDP and system shared memory make it suitable for integrated use cases. For server workloads requiring massive memory bandwidth and tensor core acceleration, the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB provides 141 GB of HBM3e, 528 tensor cores, and 66.91 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The NVIDIA part’s 4.89 TB/s memory bandwidth and 1,045.4 GTexel/s texture rate are unmatched by the Intel chip.

The data indicates no overlap in their target applications. The Intel Arc B370’s single benchmark result and low percentile suggest modest graphics capability, while the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB’s specifications point to high-throughput server acceleration. The Intel part wins on integration efficiency and consumer feature set. The NVIDIA unit wins on every raw compute and memory metric recorded in the database. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the workload is client-side graphics or server-side compute, as the recorded specifications leave no ambiguity about their respective roles.