Intel Arc B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only one benchmark result for the Intel Arc B370, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation has no benchmark entries in the database. This makes a direct head-to-head comparison based on measured scores impossible for most workloads. The single data point available is the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where the Intel Arc B370 scores 1184. For context, the database places this score at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, meaning 95% of recorded GPUs score higher.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Arc B370 in the database, based on average benchmark scores, are all significantly older parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 averages 1186, a 0.2% difference from the Arc B370. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 averages 1190, a 0.5% gap. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M averages 1192, a 0.7% gap. The AMD FirePro M2000 averages 1168, which is 1.4% lower than the Arc B370. These deltas are all within a narrow band, indicating that the Arc B370's performance in this single test sits within a cluster of older, lower-tier parts.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation has an empty benchmark array and an average benchmark score of 0, with no nearest rivals listed. The database percentile for this GPU is 50, which places it at the median of all recorded GPUs, but without actual benchmark scores, this percentile appears to be derived from its known specifications rather than measured results. Consequently, the data cannot confirm any specific performance advantage for either product in any workload. The only verified numerical comparison is the Arc B370's score versus its own nearest rivals, which shows a near-tie with legacy hardware.

FAQ

Q: What is the only benchmark score recorded for the Intel Arc B370?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has one recorded benchmark result: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184.

Q: Does the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the benchmark array for the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation is empty, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0.

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

A: The Arc B370 scores 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770, 0.7% below the AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 is at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation is at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which is higher than the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation's boost clock of 1665 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation has 7424 shading units, compared to the Intel Arc B370's 1280 shading units.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B370 is built on Intel's Panther Lake chip using the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. This is an integrated graphics processor, indicated by its IGP slot width and bus interface, and it belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It is part of the Ada-MW generation within the GeForce 40-series and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The NVIDIA part carries 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The Intel part has unknown transistor and die size figures, so no density comparison is possible. Both GPUs support the same API feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Intel Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 render output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 58 ray tracing cores, and 232 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part includes tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely, a notable architectural divergence for any AI-accelerated workloads.

The Intel Arc B370's memory subsystem is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM, no dedicated bus width, and bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These are fundamentally different memory architectures: one relies on shared system memory, the other on dedicated high-speed VRAM.

The Intel Arc B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1290 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The Intel GPU has a higher boost clock by 735 MHz, but its base clock is 990 MHz lower. Pixel and texture rates reflect the NVIDIA part's larger resource pool: the RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 133.2 GPixel/s and 386.3 GTexel/s, while the Arc B370 delivers 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s.

Compute throughput shows a similar divide. The Intel Arc B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 24.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.72 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA part's FP16 throughput is equal to its FP32, whereas the Intel part doubles its FP16 rate relative to FP32.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The process node is 3 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA, and the foundries differ (Intel versus TSMC). Transistor count and die size are known for NVIDIA (35,800 million transistors, 294 mm²) but unknown for Intel. The NVIDIA part has a transistor density of 121.8M per mm²; Intel has no recorded density.

Base clocks are 300 MHz for Intel and 1290 MHz for NVIDIA. Boost clocks are 2400 MHz for Intel and 1665 MHz for NVIDIA. The Intel GPU's memory is system shared, while NVIDIA uses 12 GB of GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Shading units: 1280 versus 7424. TMUs: 40 versus 232. ROPs: 20 versus 80. Ray tracing cores: 10 versus 58. Tensor cores: none for Intel, 232 for NVIDIA. Pixel rates: 48.00 GPixel/s versus 133.2 GPixel/s. Texture rates: 96.00 GTexel/s versus 386.3 GTexel/s. FP32: 6.144 TFLOPS versus 24.72 TFLOPS. FP16: 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 24.72 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP is 25 W for Intel and 110 W for NVIDIA. Both use IGP slot width and have no power connectors, meaning both are designed to draw power from the host system rather than external connectors. The bus interface differs: IGP for Intel versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. Release dates differ: the Intel part is dated 2026-01-26, while the NVIDIA part is dated 2023-03-20. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor (Ampere-MW) and successor (Blackwell-MW) listed, while the Intel part has neither.

The Verdict

The database contains no direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs, so any verdict must rely on the specification data and the single recorded score for the Intel part. The Intel Arc B370's only benchmark result places it at the 5th percentile, among the lowest-performing GPUs in the database, and its nearest rivals are all parts from the early 2010s. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation sits at the 50th percentile, but with no recorded score to verify its position.

From the specifications, the NVIDIA part holds a decisive advantage in nearly every compute metric. It has 5.8 times the shading units, 5.8 times the TMUs, 4 times the ROPs, 5.8 times the ray tracing cores, and 232 tensor cores where the Intel part has none. Its FP32 throughput is 24.72 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS, a 4.02 times difference. Its memory bandwidth is 432.0 GB/s versus a system-dependent shared memory implementation. Its pixel rate is 133.2 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 386.3 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s.

The Intel part's advantages are limited to its higher boost clock (2400 MHz versus 1665 MHz), its smaller process node (3 nm versus 5 nm), and its far lower TDP (25 W versus 110 W). These are meaningful for integrated graphics in a portable device, but they do not offset the NVIDIA part's resource advantages. The data indicates that the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation is the stronger GPU for any demanding workload, while the Intel Arc B370 is positioned as a low-power integrated solution. Users requiring discrete-class performance should select the NVIDIA part; users constrained by power envelopes in an integrated form factor would choose the Intel part.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B370 wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is 85 W lower than the NVIDIA part's 110 W, making it suitable for systems where thermal and power budgets are extremely tight. Its IGP slot width and bus interface mean it is integrated into the processor package with no separate card or power connectors, which suits thin and light portable devices. Its higher boost clock of 2400 MHz suggests it can reach high frequencies when power and thermal headroom permit, even if its base clock is low. Its 3 nm process node indicates a newer manufacturing technology that may contribute to its lower power draw.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in raw performance across nearly every measured dimension. Its 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs provide the resource base for high-resolution rendering. Its 58 ray tracing cores and 232 tensor cores give it dedicated hardware for ray-traced effects and AI-assisted features, neither of which the Intel part can match with its 10 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. Its 12 GB GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated high-speed storage for frame buffers and textures, whereas the Intel part shares system memory with the CPU and has bandwidth that varies with the system configuration.

The NVIDIA part's FP32 throughput of 24.72 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS makes it more suitable for compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference. Its FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 24.72 TFLOPS, whereas the Intel part's FP16 is 12.29 TFLOPS, still lower. The NVIDIA part's 133.2 GPixel/s fill rate versus 48.00 GPixel/s benefits high-resolution displays and multi-monitor setups. Its 386.3 GTexel/s texture rate versus 96.00 GTexel/s supports texture-heavy scenes.

The single recorded benchmark for the Intel Arc B370, 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, places it in the company of the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000, all within 1.4% of each other. This suggests the Intel part's real-world performance in that specific test is comparable to those legacy parts, none of which are discrete-class modern GPUs. The NVIDIA part has no recorded benchmark, but its specification sheet indicates a fundamentally higher performance tier. The data supports a clear split: the Intel Arc B370 is the choice for minimal power draw and processor integration, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation is the choice for maximum performance in a mobile discrete GPU form factor.