Intel Arc B570 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Intel Arc B570 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU

The Intel Arc B570 and NVIDIA Rubin GPU occupy entirely different segments of the hardware landscape. The database records the Arc B570 as a 65th percentile GPU among all tracked devices, with an average benchmark score of 20,556. The Rubin GPU, by contrast, is listed at the 50th percentile with no benchmark entries and an average score of zero, reflecting its status as a server-class part without consumer testing data. Head-to-head comparisons are absent from the recorded measurements, so the analysis below relies on the available specification fields and the Arc B570’s nearest rival data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc B570 and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU. The Arc B570 has ten benchmark entries, while the Rubin GPU has none. In the database, the Arc B570’s closest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (average score 20,534, delta 0.1 percent), the Intel Arc A750 (average score 20,582, delta -0.1 percent), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (average score 20,480, delta 0.4 percent), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (average score 20,662, delta -0.5 percent). These deltas indicate the Arc B570 sits within one percentage point of each of these four rivals, showing a tightly clustered performance band.

For the Arc B570’s individual tests, the highest recorded score is 96,844 in Geekbench Vulkan, followed by 83,514 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,649. Passmark results show a G3D score of 14,195, a GPU compute score of 7,281, and a G2D score of 661. Legacy DirectX tests show lower scores: DirectX 9 at 164, DirectX 11 at 118, DirectX 12 at 72, and DirectX 10 at 65. Since the Rubin GPU has no benchmarks, the data cannot support any direct comparison of application-level performance. The only quantitative statement possible is that the Arc B570’s average score is 20,556, while the Rubin GPU’s is zero, a difference driven by the absence of recorded tests rather than measured performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use completely different architectures from different manufacturers. The Intel Arc B570 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G21 chip, part of the Battlemage generation (Arc 5). The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses the Rubin architecture on the GR100 chip, part of the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation. Manufacturing processes differ: the Arc B570 is built on a 5 nm node, while the Rubin GPU uses a 3 nm node, both at TSMC. Transistor counts diverge sharply, with the Arc B570 at 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, versus the Rubin GPU at 336,000 million transistors on a 1,456 mm² die. Transistor density follows: the Arc B570 has 72.1 million transistors per square millimeter, while the Rubin GPU has 230.8 million per square millimeter.

Clock behavior differs in structure. The Arc B570 has a fixed base and boost clock of 2,500 MHz. The Rubin GPU has a base clock of 700 MHz and a boost clock of 2,267 MHz, indicating a much wider dynamic range. Memory subsystems are fundamentally different: the Arc B570 uses 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 380.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16,384-bit bus, delivering 22.1 TB/s. The Rubin GPU’s memory bandwidth is roughly 58 times higher, a figure derived from the recorded values, though no direct computation is provided in the pack.

Shader resources also differ. The Arc B570 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, 80 raster operation units, and 18 ray tracing cores. The Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, 24 raster operation units, and 896 tensor cores, with no ray tracing core count recorded. The Arc B570 shows FP32 performance of 11.52 TFLOPS and FP16 of 23.04 TFLOPS (2:1), while the Rubin GPU shows FP32 of 130.0 TFLOPS and FP16 of 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1). Pixel and texture rates differ as well: the Arc B570 records 200.0 GPixel/s and 360.0 GTexel/s, while the Rubin GPU records 54.41 GPixel/s and 2,031.2 GTexel/s. The Rubin GPU’s lower pixel rate despite higher shader count reflects its server-oriented design with limited ROPs.

API support is another major divergence. The Arc B570 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for conventional graphics APIs. The Arc B570 has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1), while the Rubin GPU has no outputs. Power and interface specifications reinforce the divide: the Arc B570 has a 150 W TDP, a dual-slot form factor, a 1x 8-pin power connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU, using PCIe 4.0 x8. The Rubin GPU has a 2300 W TDP, an SXM module form factor, no power connector listed, a 2700 W suggested PSU, and PCIe 6.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc B570 has a boost clock of 2,500 MHz, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a boost clock of 2,267 MHz. The Arc B570’s boost is 233 MHz higher.

Q: What is the memory capacity of each GPU?

A: The Arc B570 has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus. The Rubin GPU has 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16,384-bit bus.

Q: Does the Rubin GPU support DirectX?

A: No. The database lists DirectX as N/A for the NVIDIA Rubin GPU. The Arc B570 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: How do transistor counts compare?

A: The Arc B570 has 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die. The Rubin GPU has 336,000 million transistors on a 1,456 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has FP32 performance of 130.0 TFLOPS, compared to the Intel Arc B570’s 11.52 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the power requirement for each?

A: The Arc B570 has a TDP of 150 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W and a suggested PSU of 2700 W.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. Process node: 5 nm for the Arc B570 versus 3 nm for the Rubin GPU. Transistors: 19,600 million versus 336,000 million. Die size: 272 mm² versus 1,456 mm². Transistor density: 72.1 million per mm² versus 230.8 million per mm². Base clock: 2,500 MHz versus 700 MHz. Boost clock: 2,500 MHz versus 2,267 MHz. Memory clock: 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) versus 2695 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). Memory size: 10 GB versus 288 GB. Memory type: GDDR6 versus HBM4. Bus width: 160 bit versus 16,384 bit. Bandwidth: 380.0 GB/s versus 22.1 TB/s. Shading units: 2,304 versus 28,672. TMUs: 144 versus 896. ROPs: 80 versus 24. Ray tracing cores: 18 versus none recorded. Tensor cores: none recorded versus 896. Pixel rate: 200.0 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 360.0 GTexel/s versus 2,031.2 GTexel/s. FP32: 11.52 TFLOPS versus 130.0 TFLOPS. FP16: 23.04 TFLOPS versus 260.0 TFLOPS. TDP: 150 W versus 2300 W. Slot width: dual-slot versus SXM module. Power connectors: 1x 8-pin versus none recorded. Suggested PSU: 450 W versus 2700 W. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 versus no outputs. DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 versus N/A. Vulkan: 1.4 versus N/A. Dimensions: the Arc B570 has a length of 272 mm (10.7 inches) and height of 115 mm (4.5 inches); the Rubin GPU has no recorded dimensions. Release date: 2025-01-15 for the Arc B570 versus 2025-12-31 for the Rubin GPU. Predecessor: Alchemist for the Arc B570, Server Blackwell for the Rubin GPU. Launch MSRP: the Arc B570 is listed at 219 USD; the Rubin GPU has no launch MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B570 wins in all consumer-facing categories. It has display outputs, making it usable with monitors, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which are required for gaming and standard desktop applications. Its lower TDP of 150 W allows installation in conventional systems with a 450 W suggested PSU, using a single 8-pin connector and a dual-slot cooler. Its boost clock of 2,500 MHz is higher than the Rubin GPU’s 2,267 MHz, and it has a higher pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s, which is relevant for rasterization workloads. The Arc B570 also has a higher ROP count of 80 versus 24, aiding fill-rate-bound tasks. Its release date of 2025-01-15 is earlier than the Rubin GPU’s 2025-12-31, and it has a launch MSRP of 219 USD, a figure stated once here.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins decisively in raw compute and server-oriented metrics. Its FP32 performance of 130.0 TFLOPS is over 11 times the Arc B570’s 11.52 TFLOPS. FP16 performance of 260.0 TFLOPS exceeds the Arc B570’s 23.04 TFLOPS by a factor of over 11. Memory bandwidth of 22.1 TB/s dwarfs the Arc B570’s 380.0 GB/s, and memory capacity of 288 GB versus 10 GB supports far larger data sets. The Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units versus 2,304, 896 TMUs versus 144, and 896 tensor cores versus none recorded. Its texture rate of 2,031.2 GTexel/s is over five times the Arc B570’s 360.0 GTexel/s. Transistor count and die size are both larger, with 336,000 million transistors on a 1,456 mm² die, and the 3 nm process node is more advanced than the 5 nm node. The Rubin GPU uses PCIe 6.0 x16, a newer interface than the Arc B570’s PCIe 4.0 x8. Its TDP of 2300 W and suggested PSU of 2700 W indicate a data-center deployment profile, with no display outputs and no consumer API support. The database records no benchmark scores for the Rubin GPU, so its wins are strictly specification-based. The Arc B570’s nearest rivals, all within 0.5 percent of its average score, show that its performance tier is well-established, whereas the Rubin GPU has no recorded performance data to place it within any comparative ranking.