Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA H20 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA H20?

A: The Arc B770 uses Intel's Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage generation) on a 368 mm² die, while the H20 uses NVIDIA's Hopper architecture (Server Hopper generation) on a much larger 814 mm² die. Both are built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the H20 integrates 80,000 million transistors versus an unknown count for the B770.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA H20 has 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.03 TB/s bandwidth, which is roughly 7.9 times higher memory bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute?

A: The H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS FP32, while the B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS. The H20's FP32 throughput is approximately 2 times higher. In FP16 (2:1), the H20 reaches 79.07 TFLOPS versus 39.32 TFLOPS for the B770.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The B770 has a 225 W TDP and suggests a 550 W power supply, using a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connector setup. The H20 has a 500 W TDP and suggests a 900 W power supply, with its SXM module design not requiring standard power connectors.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The Arc B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H20 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its server-oriented design with no display outputs.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The H20 has 9,984 shading units, while the B770 has 4,096. The H20 also has 312 tensor cores and 312 TMUs, whereas the B770 has 256 TMUs and 32 RT cores but no listed tensor cores.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B770 and NVIDIA H20 represent two divergent design philosophies. The B770 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of Intel's Battlemage generation, and is fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. Its die measures 368 mm². The H20 uses the Hopper architecture, belongs to the Server Hopper generation, and also uses a 5 nm TSMC process, but its die is 814 mm², more than double the B770's size. The H20's transistor count is documented at 80,000 million, with a density of 98.3M transistors per mm². The B770's transistor count is not recorded.

The B770 is a client-oriented graphics card with 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 dedicated RT cores. It lacks listed tensor cores. The H20 is a server accelerator with 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, only 24 ROPs, and 312 tensor cores. RT core count is not listed for the H20. The H20's ROP count is remarkably low relative to its shading unit count, which suggests a compute-first design where pixel output is not a priority. The B770's pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s far exceeds the H20's 47.52 GPixel/s, confirming the B770 is built for rasterization workloads.

Memory architecture reveals further divergence. The B770 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s. The H20 uses 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus, yielding 4.03 TB/s. The H20's memory bus is 24 times wider, and its bandwidth is approximately 7.9 times higher. Clock speeds also differ: the B770 runs at 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, while the H20 runs at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The B770's higher clocks help compensate for its narrower memory interface.

The B770 provides display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1) and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The H20 has no display outputs and uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The B770 is dual-slot with standard power connectors; the H20 is an SXM module, a form factor designed for server chassis. The H20's API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, while the B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data indicates two devices with almost no functional overlap. The Intel Arc B770 is a rasterization-focused graphics card: it has a high pixel rate (307.2 GPixel/s), a full set of display outputs, and consumer graphics API support. Its 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU make it suitable for a desktop build. The NVIDIA H20 is a server accelerator: no display outputs, no consumer graphics API support, an SXM module form factor, and a 500 W TDP with a 900 W suggested PSU.

For pure FP32 compute, the H20's 39.54 TFLOPS is 2 times the B770's 19.66 TFLOPS. For FP16, the H20's 79.07 TFLOPS is 2 times the B770's 39.32 TFLOPS. A workload that needs massive memory capacity (96 GB) and bandwidth (4.03 TB/s) would require the H20. A workload that needs rasterization throughput, pixel fill, or graphics output would require the B770.

The B770's release date is recorded as 2025-12-31, while the H20's is 2024-01-31. The H20 is marked as Active in production and has a successor (Server Blackwell), while the B770's production status is not recorded. The B770's predecessor is Alchemist; the H20's predecessor is Server Ada. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP, benchmark scores, or nearest rival data in the database.

Users who need a graphics card for rendering to a display should pick the B770. Users who need a high-throughput compute accelerator for server deployments should pick the H20. The two products are not substitutes for each other.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc B770 and NVIDIA H20:

• Chip: BMG-G31 (B770) vs GH100 (H20)
• Architecture: Xe2-HPG (B770) vs Hopper (H20)
• Generation: Battlemage (Arc 7) (B770) vs Server Hopper (Hxx) (H20)
• Transistors: unknown (B770) vs 80,000 million (H20)
• Die Size: 368 mm² (B770) vs 814 mm² (H20)
• Transistor Density: null (B770) vs 98.3M / mm² (H20)
• Base Clock: 2100 MHz (B770) vs 1830 MHz (H20)
• Boost Clock: 2400 MHz (B770) vs 1980 MHz (H20)
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective (B770) vs 1313 MHz, 5.3 Gbps effective (H20)
• Memory Size: 16 GB (B770) vs 96 GB (H20)
• Memory Type: GDDR6 (B770) vs HBM3 (H20)
• Bus Width: 256 bit (B770) vs 6144 bit (H20)
• Bandwidth: 512.0 GB/s (B770) vs 4.03 TB/s (H20)
• Shading Units: 4096 (B770) vs 9984 (H20)
• TMUs: 256 (B770) vs 312 (H20)
• ROPs: 128 (B770) vs 24 (H20)
• RT Cores: 32 (B770) vs null (H20)
• Tensor Cores: null (B770) vs 312 (H20)
• Pixel Rate: 307.2 GPixel/s (B770) vs 47.52 GPixel/s (H20)
• Texture Rate: 614.4 GTexel/s (B770) vs 617.8 GTexel/s (H20)
• FP32: 19.66 TFLOPS (B770) vs 39.54 TFLOPS (H20)
• FP16: 39.32 TFLOPS (B770) vs 79.07 TFLOPS (H20)
• TDP: 225 W (B770) vs 500 W (H20)
• Slot Width: Dual-slot (B770) vs SXM Module (H20)
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin (B770) vs null (H20)
• Suggested PSU: 550 W (B770) vs 900 W (H20)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 (B770) vs PCIe 5.0 x16 (H20)
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a + 3x DisplayPort 2.1 (B770) vs No outputs (H20)
• APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 (B770) vs N/A for all (H20)
• Production Status: null (B770) vs Active (H20)
• Release Date: 2025-12-31 (B770) vs 2024-01-31 (H20)
• Predecessor: Alchemist (B770) vs Server Ada (H20)
• Successor: null (B770) vs Server Blackwell (H20)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Arc B770 and NVIDIA H20. Both devices have an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs. Without recorded benchmark data, the comparison must rely on the specification-derived metrics.

The most significant compute advantage for the H20 is in FP32 throughput. The H20 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS for the B770, a 2 times advantage. FP16 follows the same pattern: 79.07 TFLOPS versus 39.32 TFLOPS, again a 2 times advantage. Texture rate is nearly identical: 617.8 GTexel/s for the H20 versus 614.4 GTexel/s for the B770, a difference of 0.6 percent.

The B770's clearest victories are in pixel throughput and display capability. Its pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s is 6.5 times higher than the H20's 47.52 GPixel/s. This is a decisive margin and reflects the H20's minimal ROP count of 24 versus the B770's 128. The B770 also has a higher boost clock (2400 MHz versus 1980 MHz) and a higher base clock (2100 MHz versus 1830 MHz).

Memory bandwidth favors the H20 overwhelmingly. The H20's 4.03 TB/s is 7.9 times the B770's 512.0 GB/s. Memory capacity favors the H20 by a factor of 6: 96 GB versus 16 GB. The H20's bus width of 6144 bit is 24 times the B770's 256 bit.

The H20 has more shading units (9,984 versus 4,096, a 2.4 times advantage) and more TMUs (312 versus 256, a 1.2 times advantage). The H20's 312 tensor cores have no counterpart in the B770's listed specifications. The B770's 32 RT cores have no counterpart in the H20's listed specifications.

Power efficiency is a point in the B770's favor. The B770's 225 W TDP delivers 19.66 TFLOPS FP32, which is approximately 87.4 GFLOPS per watt. The H20's 500 W TDP delivers 39.54 TFLOPS FP32, which is approximately 79.1 GFLOPS per watt. The B770 achieves a 10.5 percent higher FP32-per-watt ratio, despite delivering half the absolute compute.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B770 wins in graphics-oriented workloads. Its 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate, 6.5 times the H20's, makes it the only one of the two capable of high-resolution rasterization. Its 128 ROPs and 32 RT cores support traditional rendering pipelines. The B770's display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1) and consumer API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) mean it can drive monitors and run graphics applications directly. Its lower TDP of 225 W and 550 W suggested PSU fit within a desktop power budget.

The NVIDIA H20 wins in compute-intensive server workloads. Its 39.54 TFLOPS FP32 and 79.07 TFLOPS FP16 are each 2 times the B770's figures. Its 96 GB HBM3 memory with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth provides 7.9 times the bandwidth and 6 times the capacity of the B770. The 312 tensor cores give it a dedicated pathway for matrix operations that the B770 lacks entirely. The H20's 9984 shading units provide 2.4 times the B770's count. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bus generation of the B770's PCIe 4.0 x16.

The texture rate is effectively a tie. The H20's 617.8 GTexel/s is 0.6 percent ahead of the B770's 614.4 GTexel/s, a margin unlikely to produce meaningful differences in real workloads.

The production status and release timeline also favor different uses. The H20 is Active in production and was released on 2024-01-31, with a successor already named (Server Blackwell). The B770's production status is not recorded and its release date is 2025-12-31, nearly two years after the H20.

In summary, the B770 is the choice for graphics rendering and display output. The H20 is the choice for server-side compute and large-memory workloads. Neither device can substitute for the other's strengths.