Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104?

A: The Intel Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip with Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage generation) on a 5 nm TSMC process, while the NVIDIA card uses the AD104 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture on the same 5 nm TSMC process. The B770 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, whereas the RTX 4060 Ti has 4352 shading units, 136 TMUs, and only 48 ROPs.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The Arc B770 offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 4060 Ti provides 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B770's memory bandwidth is substantially higher, and it has twice the capacity.

Q: What are the raw compute throughput figures for each card?

A: The Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 rate), while the RTX 4060 Ti delivers 22.06 TFLOPS FP32 and 22.06 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 rate). The NVIDIA card has higher FP32 throughput, but the Intel card has a significant FP16 advantage.

Q: How do their display outputs differ?

A: The Arc B770 includes 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The RTX 4060 Ti includes 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Intel card supports a newer DisplayPort standard.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, using a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connector setup. The RTX 4060 Ti has a TDP of 160 W with a 450 W suggested PSU and uses a single 16-pin connector.

Q: What is the production status and release timing for each product?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti AD104 is marked as end-of-life and was released in early 2024. The Arc B770 has a release date in late 2025. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 399 USD.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B770 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 represent two distinct design philosophies within the same process generation. Both chips are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm node, but their internal organizations diverge sharply.

The Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 die measuring 368 mm², while the RTX 4060 Ti uses the AD104 die measuring 294 mm². The Intel die is physically larger, and the database records the NVIDIA chip's transistor count at 35,800 million with a density of 121.8M per mm², while the Intel transistor count is listed as unknown. The B770's larger die area suggests a design prioritizing wide memory interfaces and rasterization resources.

Shader configuration differs notably. The B770 packs 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 ROPs. The RTX 4060 Ti has 4352 shading units but only 136 TMUs and 48 ROPs. The Intel card has nearly triple the ROP count and almost double the TMU count, which directly impacts pixel fill and texture throughput. The pixel rate for the B770 is 307.2 GPixel/s versus 121.7 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA card, and the texture rate is 614.4 GTexel/s versus 344.8 GTexel/s.

Ray tracing and tensor hardware also differ. The Arc B770 includes 32 RT cores and does not list tensor cores in the database. The RTX 4060 Ti includes 34 RT cores and 136 tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API coverage is identical.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The B770 uses a 256-bit bus with 16 GB GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, yielding 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4060 Ti uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB GDDR6 at 18 Gbps effective, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The B770 has 78% more bandwidth and twice the capacity. Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA card, with a 2310 MHz base and 2535 MHz boost versus 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost for the Intel card.

Power delivery and board design reflect these choices. The B770 draws 225 W TDP with a 550 W suggested PSU and uses dual power connectors (6-pin plus 8-pin). The RTX 4060 Ti draws 160 W TDP with a 450 W suggested PSU and a single 16-pin connector. The NVIDIA card also uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Intel card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RTX 4060 Ti has recorded physical dimensions of 240 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width; the Arc B770 dimensions are not recorded.

The RTX 4060 Ti is designated end-of-life in the database, with the GeForce 50 series as its successor. The Arc B770's predecessor is Alchemist, and it has no recorded successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently shows no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two products, and neither card has an average benchmark score above zero. The wins count for each card is zero, and the nearest rivals list is empty. However, the raw specification data allows for direct performance comparisons based on theoretical throughput rates.

In FP32 compute, the RTX 4060 Ti leads with 22.06 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS for the Arc B770. That is a 12.2% advantage for the NVIDIA card in single-precision workloads. The B770 counters in FP16 with 39.32 TFLOPS versus 22.06 TFLOPS, a 78.2% advantage for the Intel card. The B770's FP16 rate is achieved through a 2:1 ratio, meaning it halves FP32 throughput to double FP16, while the RTX 4060 Ti runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio.

Pixel fill rate heavily favors the Arc B770. The B770 outputs 307.2 GPixel/s versus 121.7 GPixel/s for the RTX 4060 Ti, a 152% advantage. This difference stems from the B770's 128 ROPs versus 48 ROPs, despite the NVIDIA card's higher clock speeds. Texture fill rate also favors Intel: 614.4 GTexel/s versus 344.8 GTexel/s, a 78.2% advantage, driven by the B770's 256 TMUs versus 136 TMUs.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive area. The B770's 512.0 GB/s exceeds the RTX 4060 Ti's 288.0 GB/s by 77.8%. This bandwidth advantage, combined with 16 GB versus 8 GB capacity, gives the Intel card a substantial edge in memory-intensive workloads such as high-resolution textures and large datasets. The NVIDIA card's 18 Gbps effective memory speed is higher than the B770's 16 Gbps, but the narrower 128-bit bus limits total throughput.

Clock speeds favor the RTX 4060 Ti. The NVIDIA card boosts to 2535 MHz versus 2400 MHz for the B770, a 5.6% higher boost clock, and its base clock of 2310 MHz is 10% higher than the B770's 2100 MHz. These clock advantages help the NVIDIA card in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks, but they do not overcome the B770's structural advantages in ROPs, TMUs, and memory width.

The RTX 4060 Ti includes 136 tensor cores, which the B770 lacks entirely. This gives the NVIDIA card a dedicated hardware path for AI inference and DLSS-style workloads, although the database does not record tensor core performance numbers for the B770. The B770's 32 RT cores versus 34 RT cores for the NVIDIA card is a narrow gap, suggesting comparable ray tracing hardware counts.

Power efficiency data from the database shows the RTX 4060 Ti delivers its 22.06 TFLOPS FP32 at 160 W, while the B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS at 225 W. The NVIDIA card achieves higher FP32 throughput at 29% lower power draw, indicating a significant efficiency advantage in single-precision compute per watt.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two differently oriented products. The Intel Arc B770 is designed for rasterization throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth. Its 128 ROPs, 256 TMUs, 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 16 GB capacity make it the stronger candidate for high-resolution rendering, texture-heavy scenes, and workloads that saturate memory bandwidth. The theoretical pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 614.4 GTexel/s indicate a card built to push large frame buffers and complex geometry without bottlenecking on fill rate.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 is optimized for compute efficiency and feature breadth. Its 22.06 TFLOPS FP32 output, 136 tensor cores, higher clock speeds, and 160 W TDP indicate a card that excels in single-precision compute, AI-accelerated tasks, and power-constrained scenarios. The 399 USD launch MSRP positions it as a mainstream product, though pricing considerations are secondary to the performance profile.

The FP16 comparison is stark: the B770 delivers 39.32 TFLOPS versus 22.06 TFLOPS for the RTX 4060 Ti. For workloads that can leverage packed FP16 math, the Intel card offers nearly double the throughput. The B770 also provides DisplayPort 2.1 versus DisplayPort 1.4a on the NVIDIA card, which matters for high-refresh-rate, high-resolution displays.

The RTX 4060 Ti counters with a 12.2% FP32 advantage, a larger RT core count (34 versus 32), dedicated tensor cores, and a 5.6% higher boost clock. Its 8 GB memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth may constrain it in large memory footprint scenarios, but its lower TDP and smaller physical footprint (240 mm length versus unspecified for the B770) make it a more flexible installation option.

The database shows the RTX 4060 Ti as end-of-life with a successor in the GeForce 50 series, while the Arc B770 is a newer release from the Battlemage generation. The B770's larger die size of 368 mm² versus 294 mm² indicates a more complex chip, and its 225 W TDP reflects the cost of that complexity.

For users prioritizing raw rasterization throughput, memory bandwidth, and FP16 compute, the Arc B770's data is compelling. For users prioritizing FP32 compute, tensor core acceleration, power efficiency, and established driver maturity (inferred from NVIDIA's longer market presence), the RTX 4060 Ti's data supports that choice. The absence of recorded benchmark scores means these conclusions rest on theoretical specifications rather than measured application performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc B770 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti AD104 |

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

| Chip | BMG-G31 | AD104 |

| Architecture | Xe2-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Generation | Battlemage (Arc 7) | GeForce 40 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 368 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistors | unknown | 35,800 million |

| Base Clock | 2100 MHz | 2310 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 2535 MHz |

| Memory Speed | 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 4352 |

| TMUs | 256 | 136 |

| ROPs | 128 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 34 |

| Tensor Cores | not listed | 136 |

| Pixel Rate | 307.2 GPixel/s | 121.7 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 614.4 GTexel/s | 344.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 19.66 TFLOPS | 22.06 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 22.06 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 160 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 450 W |

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

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

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| Length | not recorded | 240 mm 9.4 inches |

| Height | not recorded | 111 mm 4.4 inches |

| Width | not recorded | 40 mm 1.6 inches |

| Production Status | not recorded | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31 | 2024-03-31 |

| Predecessor | Alchemist | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | not recorded | GeForce 50 |

| Launch MSRP | not recorded | 399 USD |