Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB. Both entries have an empty benchmark array, a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs, and an average benchmark score of zero. This absence of measured performance data means any comparison must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and computed throughput figures available in the database.

What the recorded data does show is a dramatic difference in raw computational capacity. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB delivers 66.91 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS. That places the H200 roughly 3.4 times higher in single-precision floating-point throughput. The gap widens in FP16 workloads: the H200 reaches 133.8 TFLOPS, while the B770 reaches 39.32 TFLOPS, a ratio of approximately 3.4 to 1 as well, since both parts use a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio.

Texture throughput shows a similar pattern. The H200 renders 1,045.4 GTexel/s, compared to 614.4 GTexel/s for the B770, giving the NVIDIA part a 1.7 times advantage. Pixel throughput, however, is an outlier. The B770 posts 307.2 GPixel/s against the H200's 47.52 GPixel/s, meaning the Intel part is roughly 6.5 times faster in pixel fill rate. This inversion is notable, as it stems from the H200's very low ROP count of 24, compared to 128 ROPs on the B770.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the H200. It offers 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth from 141 GB of HBM3e across a 6144-bit bus. The B770 offers 512.0 GB/s from 16 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus. The H200's bandwidth advantage is approximately 9.6 times. These figures, rather than any benchmark run, form the quantitative basis for comparing the two.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages and target different segments. The Intel Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip under the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation. Its predecessor is listed as Alchemist. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB uses the GH100 chip under the Hopper architecture, part of the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation, with Server Ada as its predecessor and Server Blackwell as its successor.

Both chips are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The similarities stop there. The H200's die measures 814 mm² and contains 80,000 million transistors, a density of 98.3 million transistors per mm². The B770's die is 368 mm² with a transistor count listed as unknown. The B770's smaller die and unknown transistor count indicate a fundamentally different design scale.

Shading resources differ sharply. The H200 carries 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The B770 carries 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The H200 has 4.1 times more shading units and 2.1 times more TMUs, but the B770 has 5.3 times more ROPs. The H200 also integrates 528 tensor cores, while the B770 lists no tensor core count. Conversely, the B770 includes 32 ray tracing cores, while the H200 lists none.

Clock behavior also differs. The B770 runs at a 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, while the H200 runs at 1500 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. The B770's higher clocks partially compensate for its lower core counts, but not enough to close the FP32 gap. Memory clocks differ as well: the B770's GDDR6 runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while the H200's HBM3e runs at 1593 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective. The HBM3e's enormous 6144-bit bus is what produces the 4.89 TB/s bandwidth.

API support separates the two clearly. The B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H200 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, consistent with a server accelerator that does not target conventional graphics APIs. The H200 also has no display outputs, while the B770 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1.

Power and form factor reflect their different deployments. The B770 has a 225 W TDP, a dual-slot design, and uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested 550 W PSU. The H200 has a 700 W TDP, comes as an SXM module, uses an 8-pin EPS connector, and requires a suggested 1100 W PSU. The H200 is listed as Active in production status, while the B770's production status is null.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates the NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB wins decisively in FP32 compute, FP16 compute, texture throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and shading unit count. Its 66.91 TFLOPS FP32 and 133.8 TFLOPS FP16 place it in a different performance class for numerically intensive workloads. The 141 GB memory capacity and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth make it suited for large datasets that cannot fit in the B770's 16 GB frame buffer. The 528 tensor cores add a dedicated matrix math pathway that the B770 does not list.

The Intel Arc B770 wins in pixel fill rate and in features tied to conventional graphics rendering. Its 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate, enabled by 128 ROPs, is far ahead of the H200's 47.52 GPixel/s. The B770 also includes ray tracing cores, a full graphics API suite, and display outputs. These traits point toward rasterization-heavy workloads and direct display output, while the H200 offers no display outputs and no graphics API support.

The clock advantage belongs to the B770, with a 2400 MHz boost versus 1980 MHz. This contributes to its competitiveness in pixel throughput despite far fewer cores. The H200's higher transistor count and larger die size indicate a design aimed at throughput density rather than per-clock efficiency in graphics tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB delivers 66.91 TFLOPS FP32, compared to the Intel Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The H200 offers 141 GB of HBM3e on a 6144-bit bus with 4.89 TB/s bandwidth. The B770 offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports display output?

A: Only the Intel Arc B770 has display outputs, providing 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB lists no outputs.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H200 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The B770 has a 225 W TDP and a suggested 550 W PSU. The H200 has a 700 W TDP and a suggested 1100 W PSU.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The H200 has 16,896 shading units, while the B770 has 4,096 shading units.

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two GPUs into distinct categories. The NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB is the choice for compute-heavy workloads that demand high FP32 and FP16 throughput, massive memory capacity, and extreme bandwidth. Its 66.91 TFLOPS FP32, 133.8 TFLOPS FP16, 141 GB memory, and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth make it a server-class accelerator, consistent with its SXM module form factor, 700 W TDP, and lack of display outputs.

The Intel Arc B770 is the choice for graphics rendering tasks that rely on pixel throughput, ray tracing, and standard display connectivity. Its 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate, 32 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and display outputs align it with client-side graphics workloads. Its 225 W TDP and dual-slot design fit a conventional desktop slot.

Users who need graphics API support, display output, or high pixel fill should select the B770. Users who need maximum compute throughput, tensor core acceleration, or very large memory capacity should select the H200. The two parts do not compete in the same usage space, and the database shows no overlapping benchmark results to suggest otherwise.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc B770 | NVIDIA H200 SXM 141 GB |

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

| Chip | BMG-G31 | GH100 |

| Architecture | Xe2-HPG | Hopper |

| Generation | Battlemage (Arc 7) | Server Hopper (Hxx) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | unknown | 80,000 million |

| Die Size | 368 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor Density | null | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2100 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective | 1593 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 141 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM3e |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 6144 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 4.89 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 16896 |

| TMUs | 256 | 528 |

| ROPs | 128 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 32 | null |

| Tensor Cores | null | 528 |

| Pixel Rate | 307.2 GPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 614.4 GTexel/s | 1,045.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 19.66 TFLOPS | 66.91 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 133.8 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 700 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | SXM Module |

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

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 1100 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31T17:00:00.000Z | 2024-11-17T17:00:00.000Z |

| Predecessor | Alchemist | Server Ada |

| Successor | null | Server Blackwell |