Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation. Both products show an empty benchmark matrix, with zero wins recorded for either side. The database lists both graphics processors at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, indicating that neither card has an established performance profile in the current dataset. Without measured scores, any comparison must rely entirely on the architectural and specification differences captured in the database.

The absence of benchmark data is itself informative. The Arc B770 is a freshly listed product with a release date of December 31, 2025, while the RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation has been in the database since March 20, 2023. The newer Intel part has not yet accumulated any recorded measurements, and the NVIDIA embedded solution, despite its longer availability, also lacks benchmark entries in this particular dataset. Both cards sit at the same percentile position, which suggests the database has not yet ranked them against the full GPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation delivers 23.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc B770 provides 19.66 TFLOPS. NVIDIA holds a 3.38 TFLOPS advantage in single-precision compute.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The Intel Arc B770 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus for 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus for 432.0 GB/s. Intel offers more capacity and higher bandwidth.

Q: What are the thermal design power figures for each card?

A: The Arc B770 has a TDP of 225 W, while the RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation consumes only 100 W. The suggested power supply ratings are 550 W for Intel and 300 W for NVIDIA.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: NVIDIA integrates 5120 shading units, compared to 4096 on the Intel Arc B770. However, the Intel card has 256 texture mapping units versus 160 on NVIDIA, and 128 ROPs versus 64.

Q: What ray tracing capabilities does each card offer?

A: The Arc B770 includes 32 ray tracing cores, and the RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation includes 40. NVIDIA also adds 160 tensor cores, while the Intel card lists no tensor core count in the database.

Q: How do the physical specifications differ?

A: The Arc B770 is a dual-slot card with one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector. The NVIDIA part is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no display outputs. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Arc B770 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G31 chip, part of the Battlemage generation within the Arc 7 lineup. This is Intel's second-generation discrete GPU architecture, following the Alchemist predecessor. NVIDIA's RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD104 chip, representing the Ada-MW generation with Ampere-MW as its predecessor and Blackwell-MW as its successor.

Both processors are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there. The Intel die measures 368 mm² with transistor counts marked as unknown in the database. The NVIDIA die is smaller at 294 mm² and packs 35,800 million transistors, giving it a density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel card's transistor density is not recorded.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The Arc B770 runs at a base clock of 2100 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz. The NVIDIA part starts lower at 1725 MHz base but boosts to 2250 MHz. Memory clocks also diverge: Intel operates its GDDR6 at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective data rate, while NVIDIA runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

The compute architectures reveal different priorities. Intel allocates resources across 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, with 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. NVIDIA counters with 5120 shading units but only 160 TMUs and 64 ROPs, paired with 40 ray tracing cores and 160 tensor cores. The tensor core presence on the NVIDIA chip indicates AI acceleration capability that the Intel card does not list.

Pixel and texture throughput reflect these configurations. The Intel card achieves 307.2 GPixel/s and 614.4 GTexel/s, while NVIDIA manages 144.0 GPixel/s and 360.0 GTexel/s. Intel's wider ROP and TMU counts drive substantially higher rasterization throughput.

FP16 compute exposes another architectural divide. Intel lists 39.32 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, meaning it can double its throughput on half-precision workloads. NVIDIA lists 23.04 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, indicating it does not gain an advantage in FP16 operations.

Specification Differences

The database records several fields where these two products diverge. Memory capacity favors Intel at 16 GB versus 12 GB, with a wider 256-bit bus compared to 192-bit, and higher bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Power requirements show the largest practical difference. The Arc B770 draws 225 W and needs a dual-slot cooler with a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector. The RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation draws only 100 W, uses an IGP form factor, and requires no power connectors. The suggested PSU drops from 550 W to 300 W accordingly.

Display capabilities separate the two completely. Intel provides one HDMI 2.1a port and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. NVIDIA provides no display outputs at all, confirming its embedded role where video output is handled by other system components.

The shading unit count differs at 4096 versus 5120, and the texture unit count differs at 256 versus 160. ROP counts stand at 128 versus 64. Ray tracing cores number 32 versus 40, and tensor cores exist only on the NVIDIA side with 160 units.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16. The NVIDIA part is marked as Active in production status, while the Intel card has no production status recorded. Release dates place NVIDIA in March 2023 and Intel at the end of December 2025.

The Verdict

The data describes two products aimed at different deployment scenarios. The Intel Arc B770 is a conventional add-in board with full display output support, a dual-slot cooler, and external power connectors. Its higher TDP of 225 W, larger 368 mm² die, and 16 GB memory capacity position it as a desktop-oriented graphics card for systems that can supply adequate cooling and power.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation serves an embedded market. Its IGP form factor, absence of power connectors, and lack of display outputs indicate it is designed to be soldered into specialized systems where the host platform handles power delivery and video output. The 100 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU make it suitable for compact or power-constrained environments.

For raw rasterization throughput, the Intel card shows clear advantages in pixel rate (307.2 GPixel/s versus 144.0 GPixel/s) and texture rate (614.4 GTexel/s versus 360.0 GTexel/s). Its broader ROP and TMU counts suggest it can sustain higher fill rates in traditional rendering workloads. The NVIDIA card counters with higher FP32 compute (23.04 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS) and additional ray tracing cores, which may benefit compute-oriented or ray-traced workloads.

The absence of benchmark scores means the database cannot yet confirm how these architectural advantages translate into real-world application performance. The equal 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder status, not a measured result.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B770 wins on memory quantity and bandwidth. With 16 GB on a 256-bit bus delivering 512.0 GB/s, it provides 4 GB more capacity and 80.0 GB/s more bandwidth than the NVIDIA card. This advantage matters for workloads that store large datasets on the GPU, such as high-resolution textures or large buffer allocations. Its higher clock speeds, with a 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, also favor workloads sensitive to clock frequency.

The Intel card wins decisively on rasterization throughput. Its 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate is more than double the NVIDIA card's 144.0 GPixel/s, and its 614.4 GTexel/s texture rate exceeds NVIDIA's 360.0 GTexel/s by a wide margin. The 128 ROPs versus 64 ROPs and 256 TMUs versus 160 TMUs explain this gap. Applications that are fill-rate limited will favor the Intel architecture.

The Intel card also wins on display connectivity. Its HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs make it a complete graphics solution for driving monitors directly. The NVIDIA card has no outputs and cannot function as a display adapter without external video hardware.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Embedded Ada Generation wins on compute density in FP32. Its 23.04 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel card's 19.66 TFLOPS despite a lower 2250 MHz boost clock, a result of its 5120 shading units. The 160 tensor cores provide AI acceleration hardware that the Intel card does not list.

NVIDIA wins on power efficiency by a substantial margin. The 100 W TDP is less than half of Intel's 225 W, and the 300 W suggested PSU is 250 W lower than Intel's 550 W recommendation. For embedded systems with strict thermal or power budgets, this difference is decisive.

NVIDIA also wins on ray tracing core count with 40 cores versus 32, and on its smaller 294 mm² die with 35,800 million transistors. The transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter is recorded for NVIDIA only, while Intel's density remains unknown.

The NVIDIA card's longer market presence, with a 2023 release versus Intel's late 2025 date, and its Active production status give it a maturity advantage in the database. The Intel card lacks a recorded production status.

The data ultimately splits cleanly: Intel for rasterization, memory capacity, and display output; NVIDIA for compute, efficiency, and embedded integration. Without benchmark scores, the database cannot determine which wins matter more in practical use.