Intel Arc B770 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural identities of the Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU?

A: The Intel Arc B770 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G31 chip, built on a 5 nm TSMC process. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses the Rubin architecture on the GR100 chip, built on a 3 nm TSMC process.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc B770 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16384-bit bus, delivering 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher raw shader count?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units, while the Intel Arc B770 has 4,096 shading units. The NVIDIA part also includes 896 tensor cores, whereas the Intel part lists no tensor core count.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Intel Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP and suggests a 550 W power supply, using a dual-slot cooler with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a 2300 W TDP, suggests a 2700 W power supply, and is an SXM Module with no display outputs.

Q: Which GPU supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Arc B770 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its server-focused design without display outputs.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc B770 achieves a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU achieves 54.41 GPixel/s. The Intel card also has 128 ROPs compared to the NVIDIA card's 24 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B770 and the NVIDIA Rubin GPU are built for fundamentally different tasks, and the architecture differences reflect that split from the ground up. The Intel part is a client graphics card using the Xe2-HPG architecture, designed for rendering frames and driving displays. The NVIDIA part is a server module using the Rubin architecture, designed for compute workloads with no display outputs at all.

The manufacturing processes differ significantly. Intel uses a 5 nm TSMC node with a die size of 368 mm², while NVIDIA uses a 3 nm TSMC node with a die size of 1456 mm². The NVIDIA chip packs 336,000 million transistors, which is listed as unknown for the Intel part. This die size difference, nearly 4x larger, explains the massive gap in shader resources: 4,096 shading units on Intel versus 28,672 on NVIDIA.

Memory architecture also diverges completely. The Intel card uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, giving 512.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA module uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16384-bit bus, giving 22.1 TB/s. That is a 43x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA, but the Intel card has a much higher pixel rate: 307.2 GPixel/s versus 54.41 GPixel/s. The ROP counts tell the same story: Intel has 128 ROPs, NVIDIA has only 24.

The compute feature sets differ as well. Intel provides 32 ray tracing cores and no listed tensor cores, while NVIDIA provides no listed ray tracing cores but 896 tensor cores. The API support further separates them: Intel lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while NVIDIA lists N/A for all three. The NVIDIA module is a PCIe 6.0 x16 device with no display outputs, while the Intel card is a PCIe 4.0 x16 device with 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

The power envelopes are also worlds apart. Intel runs at 225 W TDP and suggests a 550 W power supply, using a dual-slot cooler. NVIDIA runs at 2300 W TDP and suggests a 2700 W power supply, using an SXM Module form factor. The predecessor names also indicate lineage: Intel's is Alchemist, while NVIDIA's is Server Blackwell.

The Verdict

The data indicates these two GPUs should not be compared as direct competitors because they serve entirely different deployment scenarios. The Intel Arc B770 is a client graphics card with display outputs, consumer API support, and a modest 225 W power envelope. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server compute module with no display outputs, no consumer API support, and a 2300 W power envelope.

For a desktop PC builder, the Intel Arc B770 is the only viable option from this pair. It has the display outputs, the dual-slot cooler, the PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and the DirectX/Vulkan support required for gaming and workstation use. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth are typical for a client card, and its 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate indicates strong rasterization throughput.

For a data center operator, the NVIDIA Rubin GPU is the clear choice. Its 288 GB of HBM4 memory, 22.1 TB/s bandwidth, 130.0 TFLOPS FP32, and 260.0 TFLOPS FP16 make it a compute powerhouse. The 896 tensor cores provide dedicated AI acceleration, and the SXM Module form factor is designed for server integration. The lack of display outputs is irrelevant in that context.

The benchmark data shows no head-to-head results, so the recorded wins are zero for both. The percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for both, and the average benchmark score is 0 for both. Without measured performance data, the decision rests on the specification differences. The Intel Arc B770 wins on pixel rate, ROP count, API support, and power efficiency. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins on memory capacity, memory bandwidth, shader count, texture rate, FP32, FP16, and tensor cores. Pick based on the workload, not on raw numbers, because the two are optimized for opposite ends of the compute spectrum.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The following fields highlight the key distinctions:

• Architecture: Xe2-HPG (Intel) versus Rubin (NVIDIA)
• Chip: BMG-G31 (Intel) versus GR100 (NVIDIA)
• Process Node: 5 nm (Intel) versus 3 nm (NVIDIA)
• Transistors: unknown (Intel) versus 336,000 million (NVIDIA)
• Die Size: 368 mm² (Intel) versus 1456 mm² (NVIDIA)
• Transistor Density: not listed (Intel) versus 230.8M / mm² (NVIDIA)
• Base Clock: 2100 MHz (Intel) versus 700 MHz (NVIDIA)
• Boost Clock: 2400 MHz (Intel) versus 2267 MHz (NVIDIA)
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective (Intel) versus 2695 MHz 10.8 Gbps effective (NVIDIA)
• Memory Size: 16 GB (Intel) versus 288 GB (NVIDIA)
• Memory Type: GDDR6 (Intel) versus HBM4 (NVIDIA)
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit (Intel) versus 16384 bit (NVIDIA)
• Memory Bandwidth: 512.0 GB/s (Intel) versus 22.1 TB/s (NVIDIA)
• Shading Units: 4096 (Intel) versus 28672 (NVIDIA)
• TMUs: 256 (Intel) versus 896 (NVIDIA)
• ROPs: 128 (Intel) versus 24 (NVIDIA)
• RT Cores: 32 (Intel) versus not listed (NVIDIA)
• Tensor Cores: not listed (Intel) versus 896 (NVIDIA)
• Pixel Rate: 307.2 GPixel/s (Intel) versus 54.41 GPixel/s (NVIDIA)
• Texture Rate: 614.4 GTexel/s (Intel) versus 2,031.2 GTexel/s (NVIDIA)
• FP32: 19.66 TFLOPS (Intel) versus 130.0 TFLOPS (NVIDIA)
• FP16: 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1) (Intel) versus 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1) (NVIDIA)
• TDP: 225 W (Intel) versus 2300 W (NVIDIA)
• Slot Width: Dual-slot (Intel) versus SXM Module (NVIDIA)
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin (Intel) versus not listed (NVIDIA)
• Suggested PSU: 550 W (Intel) versus 2700 W (NVIDIA)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 (Intel) versus PCIe 6.0 x16 (NVIDIA)
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 (Intel) versus No outputs (NVIDIA)
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) (Intel) versus N/A (NVIDIA)
• OpenGL: 4.6 (Intel) versus N/A (NVIDIA)
• Vulkan: 1.4 (Intel) versus N/A (NVIDIA)
• Production Status: not listed (Intel) versus Active (NVIDIA)
• Predecessor: Alchemist (Intel) versus Server Blackwell (NVIDIA)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two GPUs. The wins for each are zero, and the average benchmark score for both is 0. The percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for both, indicating that without direct measurements, each sits at the median of the database distribution by default.

The specification data, however, provides a clear picture of where each would dominate in a hypothetical comparison. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU leads massively in compute-oriented metrics. Its FP32 of 130.0 TFLOPS is 6.6x the Intel Arc B770's 19.66 TFLOPS. The FP16 gap is similar: 260.0 TFLOPS versus 39.32 TFLOPS, a 6.6x advantage. The texture rate shows a 3.3x lead for NVIDIA at 2,031.2 GTexel/s versus 614.4 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is the largest gap, with NVIDIA's 22.1 TB/s eclipsing Intel's 512.0 GB/s by a factor of 43.

The Intel Arc B770, conversely, leads in rasterization-oriented metrics. Its pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s is 5.6x higher than NVIDIA's 54.41 GPixel/s. The ROP count of 128 versus 24 gives Intel a 5.3x advantage in fill-rate capacity. The base clock is also 3x higher for Intel at 2100 MHz versus 700 MHz, though the boost clocks are closer at 2400 MHz versus 2267 MHz.

The memory types reflect the intended workloads. Intel's GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective is a client memory standard, while NVIDIA's HBM4 at 10.8 Gbps effective uses a far wider bus to achieve its bandwidth. The NVIDIA module's 16384-bit bus is 64x wider than Intel's 256-bit bus. These differences are not just numeric; they indicate entirely different memory hierarchies optimized for latency versus throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B770 wins in any scenario that requires producing pixels on a display. Its 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs make it a functional graphics card for desktop use. The DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support mean it can run modern games and graphics applications. The 128 ROPs and 307.2 GPixel/s pixel rate indicate strong fill-rate performance, which benefits high-resolution rendering and multi-monitor setups. The 32 ray tracing cores add hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects. The 225 W TDP with a 550 W suggested power supply makes it suitable for a standard desktop build with a dual-slot cooler.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins in compute-heavy, server-side workloads. The 896 tensor cores are dedicated to AI and deep learning tasks, and the 260.0 TFLOPS FP16 performance is suited for training and inference. The 288 GB of HBM4 memory with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth can hold large models and datasets entirely on-card, reducing host memory traffic. The 28,672 shading units and 2,031.2 GTexel/s texture rate support massive parallel compute grids. The SXM Module form factor and PCIe 6.0 x16 interface are designed for dense server racks. The 2300 W TDP and 2700 W suggested power supply assume a data center power infrastructure, not a desktop PSU.

The production status also matters: the NVIDIA Rubin GPU is listed as Active, meaning it is currently in production, while the Intel Arc B770's production status is not listed. The release dates are identical at 2025-12-31T17:00:00.000Z, so both enter the market at the same point. The predecessor lineage confirms the positioning: Intel's Alchemist was a client GPU family, while NVIDIA's Server Blackwell was a data center line. Each card wins where its architecture is designed to operate, and neither is a substitute for the other.