Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single benchmark result for the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scores 2910. The Intel Arc B770 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so direct head-to-head comparisons rely entirely on the NVIDIA card's nearest rivals. The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF sits at the 19th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it outperforms roughly one-fifth of the database's tested graphics cards. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, scores 2907, placing the RTX PRO 4000 just 0.1% ahead. The RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB scores 2913, which is 0.1% faster than the RTX PRO 4000. The NVIDIA Quadro P600 posts 2923, a 0.4% lead, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 scores 2893, trailing by 0.6%. These deltas are remarkably tight, with the entire cluster of rivals within a single percentage point. The data shows the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF delivers performance essentially identical to the RTX 4060 Ti family, despite its professional workstation positioning. The Intel Arc B770 has no measured scores, so its performance cannot be quantified against the RTX PRO 4000 from the database alone. The wins column shows zero for both cards, confirming the absence of head-to-head test data.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B770 uses the BMG-G31 chip built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Arc 7) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 368 mm². The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF uses the GB203 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, belonging to the Blackwell PRO W (x000) generation. This chip also comes from TSMC's 5 nm process, but the die measures 378 mm², slightly larger than Intel's. The NVIDIA chip packs 45,600 million transistors, yielding a density of 120.6 million per mm². Intel's transistor count is listed as unknown, so no direct density comparison is possible. The architecture philosophies diverge sharply. Intel allocates 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 raster output units, with 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. NVIDIA counters with 8,960 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, alongside 70 ray tracing cores and 280 tensor cores. The NVIDIA card's tensor core count is a major differentiator, enabling AI acceleration that the Intel card lacks entirely, as its tensor core count is listed as null. Clock behavior also contrasts. The Intel card runs a base clock of 2100 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz, while the NVIDIA card sits at a low 405 MHz base and 1342 MHz boost. The NVIDIA card compensates with a much wider shading unit array. FP32 throughput favors NVIDIA at 24.05 TFLOPS versus Intel's 19.66 TFLOPS. FP16 performance tells a different story: Intel reaches 39.32 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio, while NVIDIA manages 24.05 TFLOPS at a strict 1:1 ratio. Memory technology differs as well. Intel uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s. NVIDIA uses 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has more capacity but lower bandwidth. Power draw is starkly different: Intel consumes 225 W with both 6-pin and 8-pin connectors, while NVIDIA draws only 70 W with no power connectors at all. The suggested PSU reflects this, 550 W for Intel versus 250 W for NVIDIA. Both cards support PCIe, but Intel uses 4.0 x16 while NVIDIA uses 5.0 x8. Display outputs differ: Intel offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while NVIDIA provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1b. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF wins on raw compute density and AI features based on the recorded data. Its 24.05 TFLOPS FP32 output exceeds Intel's 19.66 TFLOPS, a meaningful margin for compute-heavy workloads. The 280 tensor cores give it a clear advantage for machine learning inference, neural rendering, or DLSS-style acceleration, none of which the Intel card can match. The 24 GB memory capacity doubles the practical working set for large datasets, and GDDR7 offers a newer memory standard. The 70 W power draw is a decisive win for constrained chassis, as it requires no external power connectors and only a 250 W PSU, making it suitable for small form factor builds. The 167 mm length, 69 mm height, and 40 mm width fit tight spaces. The Intel Arc B770 wins on memory bandwidth and raw rasterization throughput. Its 512.0 GB/s bandwidth outpaces NVIDIA's 432.0 GB/s, which helps texture-heavy scenes. The 128 ROPs versus NVIDIA's 96 ROPs gives Intel a theoretical pixel fill advantage, with 307.2 GPixel/s versus 128.8 GPixel/s. Texture rate also favors Intel at 614.4 GTexel/s versus 375.8 GTexel/s. The Intel card's 16 GB GDDR6 is ample for most gaming scenarios, and its higher clocks suggest responsiveness in lightly threaded workloads. The 225 W TDP indicates a more power-hungry design, but it delivers higher fill rates per clock. The Intel card's FP16 throughput of 39.32 TFLOPS doubles its FP32 rate, which benefits compute tasks that can use reduced precision, though the NVIDIA card's tensor cores may still win in AI-specific operations. Neither card has recorded benchmark wins, so these conclusions come from architectural specifications rather than measured tests.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. Process node is identical at 5 nm from TSMC, but die size varies: 368 mm² for Intel versus 378 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor count is unknown for Intel, while NVIDIA lists 45,600 million with a density of 120.6M per mm². Memory size differs at 16 GB versus 24 GB, with Intel using GDDR6 and NVIDIA using GDDR7. Bus width is 256-bit for Intel and 192-bit for NVIDIA. Bandwidth goes to Intel at 512.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s for NVIDIA. Shading units differ dramatically: 4,096 for Intel versus 8,960 for NVIDIA. TMUs are 256 versus 280, while ROPs are 128 versus 96. Ray tracing cores count 32 for Intel and 70 for NVIDIA. Tensor cores exist only on NVIDIA, at 280. Pixel rate favors Intel at 307.2 GPixel/s versus 128.8 GPixel/s, and texture rate also favors Intel at 614.4 GTexel/s versus 375.8 GTexel/s. FP32 favors NVIDIA at 24.05 TFLOPS versus 19.66 TFLOPS. FP16 favors Intel at 39.32 TFLOPS versus NVIDIA's 24.05 TFLOPS, with Intel using a 2:1 ratio and NVIDIA using 1:1. TDP is 225 W for Intel versus 70 W for NVIDIA. Power connectors are 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin for Intel, none for NVIDIA. Suggested PSU is 550 W versus 250 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for Intel, PCIe 5.0 x8 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1a plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1 for Intel, 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1b for NVIDIA. Release dates differ, with Intel listed as 2025-12-31 and NVIDIA as 2025-08-10. NVIDIA has a production status of Active; Intel's status is not provided. NVIDIA has recorded dimensions of 167 mm length, 69 mm height, 40 mm width; Intel's dimensions are absent. NVIDIA has a predecessor of Workstation Ada; Intel's predecessor is Alchemist. Both cards are dual-slot designs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc B770 delivers 512.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, which is higher than the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF's 432.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card support AI acceleration?

A: Yes, the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF includes 280 tensor cores, a feature the Intel Arc B770 does not have, as its tensor core count is listed as null.

Q: How much power does each card require?

A: The Intel Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors, and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The NVIDIA card has a 70 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which card has more memory capacity?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF has 24 GB of GDDR7, while the Intel Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6.

Q: How does the NVIDIA card compare to its nearest rivals in 3DMark Steel Nomad?

A: The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF scores 2910, which is 0.1% ahead of the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB (2907), 0.1% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (2913), 0.4% behind the Quadro P600 (2923), and 0.6% ahead of the RTX 4010 (2893).

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA card leads with 24.05 TFLOPS, compared to 19.66 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc B770.

The Verdict

The data points toward two distinct use cases. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF is the clear choice for professional and AI-oriented workloads. Its 24.05 TFLOPS FP32 output, 280 tensor cores, and 24 GB memory make it suitable for compute tasks that demand both parallelism and capacity. The 70 W power draw with no external connectors means it fits in small form factor systems with minimal power requirements, as the 250 W suggested PSU confirms. Its compact dimensions of 167 mm by 69 mm by 40 mm reinforce this positioning. The benchmark score of 2910 in 3DMark Steel Nomad places it in line with mainstream GeForce cards, so it does not sacrifice typical gaming performance despite its workstation label. The Intel Arc B770 targets a different profile. Its 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, 128 ROPs, and 614.4 GTexel/s texture rate suggest strong rasterization throughput for high-resolution gaming. The higher clocks of 2100 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, combined with 16 GB GDDR6, support a traditional gaming card design. The 225 W TDP and 550 W PSU requirement indicate a card meant for standard desktop builds with available power connectors. The FP16 advantage at 39.32 TFLOPS gives it an edge in mixed-precision compute, but the lack of tensor cores limits its AI capabilities. For a builder prioritizing AI acceleration, compactness, and power efficiency, the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF wins on every recorded metric except raw fill rates. For a builder focused on pure rasterization performance per clock, the Arc B770's higher pixel and texture rates offer theoretical advantages, though no benchmark data confirms this in practice. The absence of any recorded benchmarks for the Intel card means its real-world performance remains unverified in the database. The NVIDIA card has one measured result, and it competes within a tight 1% window of its nearest rivals, showing consistent performance. The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: choose NVIDIA for compute-heavy, AI-enabled, low-power professional work, and choose Intel only if the higher fill rates and bandwidth align with specific rasterization needs, accepting that its performance is unmeasured.