Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile vs Intel Arc Pro B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two parts. Both the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile and the Intel Arc Pro B370 share an identical percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs in the database, and neither has an average benchmark score recorded. The wins tally is 0 for each, meaning the database holds no comparative frame-to-frame or synthetic test results between them. What the data does provide is a clear separation in raw compute and rendering throughput, which allows for a comparative analysis based on their specification-derived performance ceilings.

The most significant advantage for the Intel Arc Pro B370 lies in floating-point throughput. Its FP32 rating of 6.144 TFLOPS is roughly 56% higher than the 3.942 TFLOPS of the Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. In practical terms, this indicates that the B370 can handle substantially more parallel arithmetic operations per second, which typically translates to faster shader execution in modern titles. The gap narrows somewhat in FP16 compute, where the B370 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Mobile part, but the B370 still holds a decisive edge of about 56% in that metric as well.

The texture and pixel throughput story is more nuanced. The Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile posts a texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s, which is approximately 28% higher than the B370's 96.00 GTexel/s. This is a notable win for the Mobile part, as higher texel throughput generally improves fill-rate-bound scenes with heavy texture sampling. In pixel rate, the Mobile part also takes the lead, delivering 52.80 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s for the B370, a margin of roughly 10%. These wins suggest that the Mobile GPU, despite its lower overall compute, can outperform the B370 in certain rasterization-heavy workloads that are limited by texture and pixel processing rather than raw shader math.

Clock speeds also favor the B370. Its boost clock reaches 2400 MHz, while the Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile tops out at 2200 MHz, a difference of 200 MHz. Both share a base clock of 300 MHz. The higher boost frequency on the B370 partially explains its compute advantage, but the Mobile part compensates with a larger texture unit count, 56 versus 40, and a larger ROP count, 24 versus 20. The shading unit count tells a different story: the B370 has 1280 shading units versus 896 for the Mobile part, a 43% increase that aligns with its TFLOPS advantage.

In summary, the data indicates a clear split: the B370 wins on compute-centric metrics (FP32, FP16, shader count, boost clock), while the Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins on rasterization-centric metrics (texture rate, pixel rate, TMUs, ROPs). Without benchmark scores, the practical impact of these differences remains speculative, but the specification deltas are large enough to expect measurable performance gaps in respective workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs stem from different architectural generations and manufacturing nodes. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is built on the Meteor Lake chip using the Xe-LPG architecture, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture. This generational leap is reflected in the process node: the Mobile part is fabricated on a 10 nm process, whereas the B370 uses a 3 nm process. The smaller node on the B370 allows for denser transistor packing and improved power efficiency, though the database does not list transistor counts or die sizes for either part.

The architectural generation also dictates feature support. The B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing capabilities. The database records 10 RT cores on the B370, a feature entirely absent from the Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile, which lists no RT cores. This is a fundamental difference: the B370 can execute ray-traced effects in hardware, while the Mobile part must rely on compute-based alternatives or omit such effects entirely. Both GPUs support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level compatibility is otherwise similar.

Memory architecture is identical in form: both use System Shared memory, meaning they draw from the host system's RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as System Shared or System Dependent for both parts. This means neither GPU has a dedicated memory pool, and their effective bandwidth will scale with the host system's memory configuration. The bus interface differs slightly: the Mobile part uses Ring Bus, while the B370 uses IGP. Both are integrated graphics solutions, as indicated by their IGP slot width classification.

The B370 further distinguishes itself with a much lower TDP of 25 W versus 65 W for the Mobile part. This is a substantial power efficiency improvement, likely enabled by the 3 nm node and newer architecture. The B370 also lists no power connectors, while the Mobile part does not specify any. Both are portable-device-dependent in display outputs, meaning their video output capabilities are tied to the host laptop or mobile platform.

The production status for both is Active. The Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile was released on December 13, 2023, while the Arc Pro B370 followed on January 26, 2026, a gap of roughly two years. The Mobile part's predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-M, and the B370's predecessor is HD Graphics-WM. Neither has a recorded successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), compared to 3.942 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) for the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile. The B370 leads by roughly 56% in both metrics.

Q: Does either GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc Pro B370 lists 10 RT cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile does not list any RT cores, so it lacks dedicated ray tracing hardware.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a TDP of 65 W. The B370 also lists no power connectors, whereas the Mobile part does not specify any.

Q: Which GPU has higher texture and pixel throughput?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile leads with 123.2 GTexel/s and 52.80 GPixel/s. The Intel Arc Pro B370 trails with 96.00 GTexel/s and 48.00 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the manufacturing nodes for these GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 uses a 3 nm process. Both are fabricated by Intel.

Q: Do both GPUs use dedicated video memory?

A: No. Both use System Shared memory with System Shared type and bus width, and their bandwidth is System Dependent. Neither has dedicated VRAM.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile and the Intel Arc Pro B370:

• Chip: Meteor Lake (Mobile) versus Panther Lake (B370)
• Architecture: Xe-LPG (Mobile) versus Xe3-LPG (B370)
• Generation: Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) versus Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake)
• Process Node: 10 nm (Mobile) versus 3 nm (B370)
• Boost Clock: 2200 MHz (Mobile) versus 2400 MHz (B370)
• Shading Units: 896 (Mobile) versus 1280 (B370)
• TMUs: 56 (Mobile) versus 40 (B370)
• ROPs: 24 (Mobile) versus 20 (B370)
• RT Cores: None listed (Mobile) versus 10 (B370)
• Pixel Rate: 52.80 GPixel/s (Mobile) versus 48.00 GPixel/s (B370)
• Texture Rate: 123.2 GTexel/s (Mobile) versus 96.00 GTexel/s (B370)
• FP32: 3.942 TFLOPS (Mobile) versus 6.144 TFLOPS (B370)
• FP16: 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) (Mobile) versus 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) (B370)
• TDP: 65 W (Mobile) versus 25 W (B370)
• Power Connectors: Not specified (Mobile) versus None (B370)
• Bus Interface: Ring Bus (Mobile) versus IGP (B370)
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_1) (Mobile) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2) (B370)
• Release Date: December 13, 2023 (Mobile) versus January 26, 2026 (B370)
• Predecessor: HD Graphics-M (Mobile) versus HD Graphics-WM (B370)

Fields that remain identical include base clock (300 MHz), memory size/type/bus width (System Shared), memory bandwidth (System Dependent), slot width (IGP), display outputs (Portable Device Dependent), OpenGL version (4.6), Vulkan version (1.4), production status (Active), and the absence of a launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B370 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its 1280 shading units and 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 throughput indicate superior performance in shader-bound scenarios, such as modern game engines with complex lighting and material calculations. The 10 RT cores give it exclusive capability for hardware-accelerated ray tracing, which is a decisive advantage for any workload that relies on realistic reflections, shadows, or global illumination. The higher 2400 MHz boost clock further supports sustained compute performance. The B370's 25 W TDP also makes it the more power-efficient option, which is relevant for thin-and-light mobile platforms where thermal and battery constraints are tight. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with the latest rendering features and effects.

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins on rasterization throughput. Its 56 TMUs and 24 ROPs deliver 123.2 GTexel/s and 52.80 GPixel/s, respectively, both higher than the B370's figures. This suggests better performance in fill-rate-limited scenarios, such as high-resolution texture streaming, post-processing effects, and traditional non-ray-traced rendering pipelines. The Mobile part also has a higher TDP of 65 W, which, while less efficient, may allow for more sustained power delivery in larger laptops or devices with better cooling. Its earlier release date, December 13, 2023, means it has been in the market longer, though both are currently listed as Active production parts.

The data does not include benchmark scores or head-to-head results, so actual performance in specific games or applications cannot be quantified. However, the specification differences point to a clear division of strengths: the B370 for compute and ray tracing, the Mobile part for texture and pixel throughput. Users prioritizing modern DirectX 12 Ultimate features and efficiency would favor the B370, while those focused on traditional rasterization throughput might prefer the Mobile part. The identical percentile ranking of 50 and the absence of average benchmark scores mean neither part has a recorded empirical edge in real-world testing.