Intel Arc B570 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only two shared benchmark tests between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z and the Intel Arc B570: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the Intel Arc B570 dominates outright. The OpenCL result shows the Arc B570 scoring 83,514 against the TITAN Z's 25,465, a delta of 69.5% in Intel's favor. That is not a marginal win; it is a generational gap expressed in raw compute throughput.

The Vulkan test is even more lopsided. The Arc B570 posts 96,844, while the TITAN Z manages 22,006, making the delta 77.3%. The TITAN Z's Vulkan score is lower than its OpenCL score, which suggests the old Kepler architecture struggles with modern API overhead. The Arc B570, by contrast, improves from OpenCL to Vulkan, a sign that its driver stack and hardware design handle Vulkan natively with better efficiency.

Out of the two head-to-head tests, the TITAN Z records zero wins. The Arc B570 takes both. For context, the TITAN Z's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile (0.5% higher average score) and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 (0.6% lower average score). That places the TITAN Z's overall average benchmark score of 23,736 in a performance band near modern mid-range and mobile parts. The Arc B570's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (0.1% higher) and the Intel Arc A750 (0.1% lower), with its average sitting at 20,556. The gap between the two cards' average scores is roughly 13%, but the head-to-head deltas are far larger, indicating that the Arc B570's wins are concentrated in the compute and graphics API tests where it excels.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from entirely different eras and design philosophies. The TITAN Z uses the GK110B chip, built on Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The Arc B570 uses the BMG-G21 chip, built on Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage generation), on a 5 nm TSMC process. It fits 19,600 million transistors into a much smaller 272 mm² die, achieving 72.1M transistors per mm². That is a density advantage of roughly 5.7 times, which explains how Intel fits more compute into less silicon.

Core counts tell a similar story of architectural evolution. The TITAN Z has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The Arc B570 has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Despite fewer shaders and TMUs, the Arc B570 produces far higher fill rates: 200.0 GPixel/s versus 52.56 GPixel/s, and 360.0 GTexel/s versus 210.2 GTexel/s. Clock speed is a major factor. The TITAN Z runs at 705 MHz base and 876 MHz boost, while the Arc B570 runs at 2,500 MHz base and 2,500 MHz boost, a massive clock advantage that more than compensates for the lower core count.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The TITAN Z uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384 bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc B570 uses 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 160 bit bus, delivering 380.0 GB/s. The older card has a wider bus but less total memory and lower bandwidth. The Arc B570's narrower bus is offset by faster memory, rated at 19 Gbps effective versus 7 Gbps effective.

Feature support is where the age gap becomes most obvious. The TITAN Z has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The Arc B570 includes 18 ray tracing cores. The TITAN Z supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Arc B570 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc B570 also supports FP16 compute at 23.04 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the TITAN Z has no listed FP16 capability. Its FP32 output is 11.52 TFLOPS, more than double the TITAN Z's 5.046 TFLOPS.

Power and physical design differ as well. The TITAN Z is rated at 375 W TDP, uses a triple-slot cooler, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and needs a 750 W suggested PSU. The Arc B570 is rated at 150 W TDP, uses a dual-slot cooler, requires a single 8-pin connector, and needs a 450 W suggested PSU. The TITAN Z measures 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 62 mm wide. The Arc B570 measures 272 mm long and 115 mm tall, with no width listed. The TITAN Z uses PCIe 3.0 x16; the Arc B570 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the TITAN Z has 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the Arc B570 has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B570 wins in every measurable category from the database. In compute workloads, its Geekbench OpenCL score of 83,514 is more than triple the TITAN Z's 25,465. In graphics API workloads, its Vulkan score of 96,844 is more than quadruple the TITAN Z's 22,006. The Arc B570 also holds advantages in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 throughput, memory bandwidth, and memory capacity. Its 10 GB frame buffer is 66% larger than the TITAN Z's 6 GB, which matters for modern textures and higher resolutions.

The TITAN Z does not win in any recorded benchmark. Its only comparative merits are structural: a wider 384 bit memory bus, a higher transistor count per die area is not a performance metric, and its 48 ROPs are fewer than the Arc B570's 80. The TITAN Z's shading unit count is higher at 2,880 versus 2,304, but the Arc B570's clock speed advantage renders that irrelevant in practice. The TITAN Z also holds a higher percentile rank among all GPUs at 69, versus the Arc B570's 65, but that percentile reflects the entire database distribution, not direct performance against this specific rival.

For users constrained by power delivery or chassis space, the Arc B570 is the clear choice. Its 150 W TDP and dual-slot cooler make it far easier to install in compact systems, and its single 8-pin connector simplifies cabling. The TITAN Z's 375 W TDP, triple-slot cooler, and two 8-pin connectors demand a larger case, a beefier PSU, and more careful airflow planning. The Arc B570 also supports modern display outputs, including DisplayPort 2.1 and HDMI 2.1a, whereas the TITAN Z is limited to older DVI, HDMI 1.4a, and DisplayPort 1.2.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the Intel Arc B570 is the superior card in every recorded benchmark and almost every relevant specification. It more than triples the TITAN Z's OpenCL score, more than quadruples its Vulkan score, doubles its FP32 throughput, offers more memory, higher bandwidth, and does so at less than half the power draw. The TITAN Z's sole advantages are its wider memory bus and higher shading unit count, neither of which translates into a win in any test.

Users who prioritize compute performance, modern API support, or energy efficiency should pick the Arc B570 without hesitation. The TITAN Z's end-of-life production status and 2014 release date place it firmly in legacy territory, while the Arc B570 is an active product with current driver support and modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate. The TITAN Z's nearest rivals in the database, such as the RTX 3080 Mobile and RX 9070, show that its average score of 23,736 is competitive with mid-range modern parts, but that does not change the head-to-head outcome. The Arc B570 is the only rational choice from this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z has an average benchmark score of 23,736, while the Intel Arc B570 has an average score of 20,556. The TITAN Z sits in the 69th percentile of all GPUs, and the Arc B570 sits in the 65th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the shared benchmarks?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc B570 scores 83,514 versus the TITAN Z's 25,465, a 69.5% difference. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc B570 scores 96,844 versus 22,006, a 77.3% difference.

Q: Does the TITAN Z support ray tracing?

A: No. The TITAN Z has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The Arc B570 includes 18 ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The TITAN Z is rated at 375 W TDP with a suggested 750 W PSU and two 8-pin connectors. The Arc B570 is rated at 150 W TDP with a suggested 450 W PSU and a single 8-pin connector.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The Arc B570 has 10 GB of GDDR6 with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN Z has 6 GB of GDDR5 with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN Z uses a 384 bit bus, while the Arc B570 uses a 160 bit bus.

Q: What is the release date and production status of each card?

A: The TITAN Z was released on 2014-05-27 and is end-of-life. The Arc B570 was released on 2025-01-15 and is active in production.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z | Intel Arc B570 |

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

| Chip | GK110B | BMG-G21 |

| Architecture | Kepler | Xe2-HPG |

| Generation | GeForce 700 | Battlemage (Arc 5) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 19,600 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 272 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 72.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 705 MHz | 2500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 876 MHz | 2500 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 2375 MHz, 19 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 10 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 380.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2880 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 240 | 144 |

| ROPs | 48 | 80 |

| RT Cores | None | 18 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.56 GPixel/s | 200.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 210.2 GTexel/s | 360.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.046 TFLOPS | 11.52 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 23.04 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 375 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 750 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2014-05-27 | 2025-01-15 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600 | Alchemist |

| Successor | GeForce 900 | None listed |

| Launch MSRP | 2,999 USD | 219 USD |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 272 mm (10.7 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 115 mm (4.5 inches) |

| Width | 62 mm (2.4 inches) | Not listed |