Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE. The benchmark arrays for both products are empty, and the wins counters show zero for each side. This absence of empirical scores means any comparison must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures provided in the database.

What the data does offer is a stark contrast in raw compute capabilities. The RTX 5090 SE delivers 66.94 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 3.40 times the 19.66 TFLOPS of the Arc B770. That margin is substantial and suggests the NVIDIA part will dominate in any FP32-bound workload, from traditional rasterization to compute-heavy applications. The texture rate tells a similar story: the RTX 5090 SE reaches 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s for the Arc B770, a 70% advantage for NVIDIA. Pixel throughput is closer but still favors NVIDIA, with 380.3 GPixel/s against 307.2 GPixel/s, a 24% lead.

The memory subsystem amplifies the NVIDIA advantage. The RTX 5090 SE carries 24 GB of GDDR7 across a 384-bit bus, yielding 1.34 TB/s of bandwidth. The Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, producing 512.0 GB/s. That is a 2.62x bandwidth gap, which will matter in high-resolution textures, ray tracing workloads, and any scenario where memory access patterns are large and frequent. The 8 GB capacity difference also allows the RTX 5090 SE to hold larger working sets without spilling to system memory.

Clock speeds are the one area where Intel fights back. The Arc B770 runs at a 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, both higher than the RTX 5090 SE's 1740 MHz base and 2377 MHz boost. The boost clocks are nearly identical, but the base clock difference of 360 MHz suggests Intel's part maintains higher sustained frequencies under load. This does not compensate for the massive core count disadvantage, however. The RTX 5090 SE has 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, and 160 ROPs, while the Arc B770 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. Those are 3.44x, 1.72x, and 1.25x ratios respectively.

Ray tracing hardware shows another major divergence. The RTX 5090 SE includes 110 RT cores and 440 tensor cores, while the Arc B770 has 32 RT cores and no tensor core entry in the database. The absence of tensor core data for Intel does not necessarily mean they are missing, but the recorded specifications list none, which creates an asymmetry in AI-accelerated features. The 110 RT cores on the NVIDIA side represent a 3.44x count advantage over Intel's 32, which typically translates to significantly faster ray-traced rendering.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural families. The Intel Arc B770 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G31 chip, part of the Battlemage generation under the Arc 7 series. The NVIDIA RTX 5090 SE uses Blackwell 2.0 on the GB202 chip, part of the GeForce 50 series. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, so the manufacturing technology is identical. The die sizes, however, differ enormously: the RTX 5090 SE measures 750 mm², while the Arc B770 is 368 mm². That is a 2.04x area difference, which explains the NVIDIA card's much higher transistor count of 92,200 million versus the unknown figure for Intel. The RTX 5090 SE also has a recorded transistor density of 122.9M per mm², which the Arc B770 lacks in the database.

The memory architecture diverges completely. Intel uses GDDR6 at 2000 MHz with a 16 Gbps effective data rate, while NVIDIA uses GDDR7 at 1750 MHz with a 28 Gbps effective rate. The newer GDDR7 standard allows higher per-pin bandwidth, which is why the RTX 5090 SE achieves 1.34 TB/s despite a relatively modest clock increase. The bus widths also differ: 256-bit for Intel versus 384-bit for NVIDIA. This combination of wider bus and faster memory yields the 2.62x bandwidth advantage noted earlier.

The power delivery systems reflect the performance disparity. The Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP and requires a single 6-pin plus an 8-pin power connector, with a suggested 550 W power supply. The RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin connector, and suggests a 900 W power supply. The NVIDIA card draws more than double the power of the Intel card, which is consistent with its much larger die and higher core counts. Both are dual-slot designs, so physical clearance in a chassis is similar, though the RTX 5090 SE has recorded dimensions of 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, while the Arc B770 has no dimension data in the database.

The interface generation also differs. The Arc B770 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16. This affects bandwidth to the host system, though the practical impact in gaming is often limited. Display outputs show a minor version bump: Intel has HDMI 2.1a and DisplayPort 2.1, while NVIDIA has HDMI 2.1b and DisplayPort 2.1b. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical in the recorded data. The predecessor and successor entries differ as well: Intel's predecessor is Alchemist, while NVIDIA's predecessor is GeForce 40 and its successor is GeForce 60.

The Verdict

The data paints an unambiguous picture of performance stratification. The RTX 5090 SE holds decisive leads in every compute metric that matters: FP32 throughput, texture rate, pixel rate, memory bandwidth, memory capacity, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, and tensor cores. The only recorded advantages for the Arc B770 are higher base clock frequency, lower TDP, and a smaller die size. None of these translate into a performance win in the database's recorded specifications.

The RTX 5090 SE is the choice for workloads that demand maximum throughput. Its 66.94 TFLOPS FP32 and 1.34 TB/s bandwidth position it for high-end gaming, professional rendering, and compute tasks. The 24 GB memory capacity and 110 RT cores further extend its utility in large-scene ray tracing and AI inference. The Arc B770, with its 19.66 TFLOPS and 512.0 GB/s, is a more modest performer that still offers 16 GB of memory and 32 RT cores, which is respectable for its 225 W power envelope.

The percentile rankings in the database are identical at 50 for both products, which might suggest parity in overall standing. This is almost certainly a placeholder or an artifact of the empty benchmark arrays, as the raw specifications show a 3.4x gap in FP32 and a 2.6x gap in bandwidth. The database's average benchmark scores are zero for both, reinforcing that no empirical testing has been recorded. Any judgment must therefore rest on the architectural data, which is overwhelming in NVIDIA's favor.

The power consumption difference is a moderating factor. The Arc B770's 225 W TDP versus the RTX 5090 SE's 500 W TDP means the Intel card is far easier to cool and requires a less substantial power supply. For constrained builds, the Arc B770 offers a viable path to 16 GB of VRAM without the 500 W thermal burden. The RTX 5090 SE's 900 W suggested PSU and 16-pin connector demand a modern, high-wattage power supply and adequate chassis airflow.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products in the database:

| Specification | Intel Arc B770 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE |

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

| Architecture | Xe2-HPG | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | BMG-G31 | GB202 |

| Generation | Battlemage (Arc 7) | GeForce 50 |

| Transistors | Unknown | 92,200 million |

| Die Size | 368 mm² | 750 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not recorded | 122.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2100 MHz | 1740 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 2377 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps) | 1750 MHz (28 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 1.34 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 14080 |

| TMUs | 256 | 440 |

| ROPs | 128 | 160 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 110 |

| Tensor Cores | Not recorded | 440 |

| Pixel Rate | 307.2 GPixel/s | 380.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 614.4 GTexel/s | 1,045.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 19.66 TFLOPS | 66.94 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 500 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 900 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

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

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

| Predecessor | Alchemist | GeForce 40 |

| Successor | Not recorded | GeForce 60 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 1,499 USD |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE delivers 66.94 TFLOPS, which is 3.40 times the 19.66 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc B770.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The RTX 5090 SE provides 1.34 TB/s across a 384-bit GDDR7 interface. The Arc B770 provides 512.0 GB/s across a 256-bit GDDR6 interface.

Q: What are the TDP requirements for each card?

A: The Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP with a suggested 550 W power supply. The RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP with a suggested 900 W power supply.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 according to the database.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX 5090 SE has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory, while the Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6. The NVIDIA card holds 8 GB more.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 5090 SE has 110 RT cores, while the Arc B770 has 32 RT cores. That is a 3.44x advantage for NVIDIA.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 SE wins in every performance-oriented category recorded in the database. Its 66.94 TFLOPS FP32 output suits compute-heavy rendering, scientific simulation, and high-resolution gaming with maximum settings. The 24 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.34 TB/s bandwidth handle large textures, complex scenes, and multi-tasking with multiple applications open. The 110 RT cores and 440 tensor cores position it for ray-traced workloads and AI-assisted features such as DLSS-style upscaling, though the database does not list specific software support. The 440 TMUs and 160 ROPs give it a strong edge in texture-heavy and pixel-bound scenarios, with a 70% texture rate advantage and a 24% pixel rate advantage over the Arc B770.

The Arc B770 has a narrower set of wins. Its 2100 MHz base clock is 360 MHz higher than the RTX 5090 SE's 1740 MHz, which could yield better responsiveness in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks where frequencies matter more than raw core counts. Its 225 W TDP is less than half the NVIDIA card's 500 W, making it the preferable option for small form factor builds, lower-capacity power supplies, or systems where thermal output is a constraint. The 16 GB memory capacity is still ample for most mainstream gaming and productivity workloads, and the 512.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The PCIe 4.0 interface is a generation behind NVIDIA's PCIe 5.0, but this rarely bottlenecks GPU performance in practice. The Arc B770's smaller 368 mm² die also suggests lower manufacturing cost and potentially better yields, though the database records no pricing for the Intel card.

The release dates are identical in the database, both set to the end of 2025. The production status for the RTX 5090 SE is listed as Active, while the Arc B770 has no production status recorded. The RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD, while the Arc B770 has no MSRP recorded. The successor entries differ: the RTX 5090 SE lists GeForce 60 as its successor, while the Arc B770 has no successor listed. The predecessor entries show Intel's Alchemist and NVIDIA's GeForce 40 as the prior generations, respectively.

For users who prioritize raw performance, memory capacity, and feature completeness, the RTX 5090 SE is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users who prioritize power efficiency, lower system requirements, and adequate mainstream performance, the Arc B770 offers a viable alternative. The database shows no benchmark scores to validate real-world behavior, so these conclusions rest solely on the architectural specifications provided.