Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Arc B770 compare to the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation in raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation delivers 26.73 TFLOPS FP32, which is 35.9% higher than the Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS. In FP16, the Arc B770 reaches 39.32 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 4000 Ada Generation sustains 26.73 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What memory configurations do these two cards offer?

A: The Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has the higher transistor count and die size?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a density of 121.8M per mm². The Arc B770 has a larger die at 368 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database.

Q: What are the physical dimensions and power requirements of each card?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a single-slot card measuring 245 mm (9.6 inches) in length and 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height, with a 130 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU. The Arc B770 is dual-slot with a 225 W TDP and a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card supports more display outputs and what types?

A: The Arc B770 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: How do these cards rank overall in the database?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation holds a 95th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 135,218. The Arc B770 sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0, as no benchmark data is currently recorded for it.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B770 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, using the BMG-G31 chip, and belongs to the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 368 mm². Its predecessor is the Alchemist architecture. The card features 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, 128 raster operation units, and 32 ray tracing cores. It has no dedicated tensor cores listed. The Arc B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, belonging to the GeForce 40-series and the Workstation Ada generation. It is also on a 5 nm TSMC process, but with a smaller die at 294 mm². The transistor count is 35,800 million, giving a density of 121.8M per mm². It has 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores. Its predecessor is Workstation Ampere, and its successor is Blackwell PRO W. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The key architectural differences are the tensor cores present only on the NVIDIA card, the higher ray tracing core count on NVIDIA (48 vs 32), and the larger shading unit count on NVIDIA (6144 vs 4096). The Intel card counters with more texture units (256 vs 192) and more raster operation units (128 vs 64). The Intel card also uses a 256-bit memory bus compared to NVIDIA's 160-bit bus.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation ranks in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Arc B770 sits at the 50th percentile. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation has recorded benchmark scores of 146,593 in Geekbench OpenCL and 123,842 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average score of 135,218. The Arc B770 has no recorded benchmark scores.

For applications relying on FP32 compute, ray tracing, or tensor core acceleration, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the stronger choice based on its 26.73 TFLOPS FP32, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. It also offers more memory capacity at 20 GB, though with lower bandwidth at 360.0 GB/s.

For workloads that favor FP16 computation, the Arc B770's 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 output exceeds the NVIDIA card's 26.73 TFLOPS. The Intel card also provides higher memory bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s, which may benefit memory-bound tasks. Its 16 GB capacity is lower, but the wider 256-bit bus gives it a bandwidth advantage.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is an active production card with a defined successor, while the Arc B770's production status is not recorded. The NVIDIA card also draws less power at 130 W versus 225 W, and requires a smaller PSU at 300 W versus 550 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc B770 | NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | Xe2-HPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Chip | BMG-G31 | AD104 |

| Generation | Battlemage (Arc 7) | Workstation Ada |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 368 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistors | unknown | 35,800 million |

| Transistor Density | null | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2100 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 2175 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 360.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 256 | 192 |

| ROPs | 128 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 32 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 192 |

| Pixel Rate | 307.2 GPixel/s | 139.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 614.4 GTexel/s | 417.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 19.66 TFLOPS | 26.73 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 300 W |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31 | 2023-08-08 |

| Production Status | null | Active |

| Predecessor | Alchemist | Workstation Ampere |

| Successor | null | Blackwell PRO W |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains recorded benchmark results for the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation, while the Intel Arc B770 has no benchmark entries. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation scores 146,593 in Geekbench OpenCL and 123,842 in Geekbench Vulkan, producing an average score of 135,218.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA A10M with an average score of 135,230 and a 0% delta, the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 at 135,396 with a -0.1% delta, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo at 135,774 with a -0.4% delta, and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 at 136,472 with a -0.9% delta. This places the RTX 4000 Ada Generation essentially at parity with these workstation cards, slightly below the AMD Radeon PRO V620.

The Arc B770 has no benchmark data, so direct head-to-head measured comparisons are unavailable. The specification comparison shows the RTX 4000 Ada Generation holding the advantage in FP32 compute, shading units, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, memory capacity, and power efficiency. The Arc B770 leads in FP16 compute, memory bandwidth, texture units, raster operation units, pixel rate, texture rate, and clock speeds (base 2100 MHz vs 1500 MHz, boost 2400 MHz vs 2175 MHz).

Where Each One Wins

Intel Arc B770 wins in:

• FP16 workloads: 39.32 TFLOPS versus 26.73 TFLOPS on the RTX 4000 Ada Generation, a 47.1% advantage.
• Memory bandwidth: 512.0 GB/s versus 360.0 GB/s, which benefits large data transfers and memory-intensive operations.
• Texture throughput: 614.4 GTexel/s versus 417.6 GTexel/s.
• Pixel fill rate: 307.2 GPixel/s versus 139.2 GPixel/s.
• Raster operation units: 128 versus 64, potentially improving fill-limited rendering.
• Texture mapping units: 256 versus 192.
• Base and boost clocks: 2100 MHz and 2400 MHz versus 1500 MHz and 2175 MHz.
• Display output variety: includes HDMI 2.1a and DisplayPort 2.1, while the NVIDIA card only offers DisplayPort 1.4a.

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation wins in:

• FP32 compute: 26.73 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS, a 35.9% advantage for general compute and graphics workloads.
• Memory capacity: 20 GB versus 16 GB, useful for larger datasets and higher resolution textures.
• Ray tracing cores: 48 versus 32, indicating stronger ray tracing capability.
• Tensor cores: 192 present versus none listed on the Arc B770, providing dedicated AI and deep learning acceleration.
• Shading units: 6144 versus 4096.
• Power efficiency: 130 W TDP versus 225 W, with a 300 W suggested PSU versus 550 W.
• Physical footprint: single-slot versus dual-slot, with defined dimensions of 245 mm length and 112 mm height.
• Production status: listed as Active, with a defined successor in Blackwell PRO W.
• Overall percentile ranking: 95th versus 50th.

The recorded benchmark data confirms the RTX 4000 Ada Generation's position in the upper tier of the database. The Arc B770's 50th percentile ranking and absent benchmark scores indicate that its real-world performance remains unverified in the database, while its specifications suggest it targets a different balance of compute capabilities, favoring FP16 throughput and memory bandwidth over FP32 raw power.