Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile and the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is a study in extremes. These two processors share almost no common ground: one is an integrated graphics solution for portable devices built on a 10 nm Intel process, the other is a 1100 W server accelerator built on a 5 nm TSMC process. The recorded data shows a single benchmark entry for the B300 SXM6 AC, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, while the Intel part has no benchmark scores recorded. The B300 SXM6 AC sits at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Intel part sits at the 50th percentile.

Given the absence of benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile, the verdict from the data is straightforward. The B300 SXM6 AC is the clear performance leader, and its average benchmark score of 369,831 places it above all of its nearest recorded rivals. The Intel part, with no recorded scores and a 50th percentile ranking, cannot be positioned as a performance competitor to this server-class accelerator. The data indicates that the B300 SXM6 AC is for compute-intensive server workloads, while the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile is for integrated graphics in portable devices. There is no overlap in their intended use cases, and the benchmark data reflects that gulf.

Where Each One Wins

The B300 SXM6 AC wins on every measurable front in this comparison. It has a recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, which is 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891), 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994), and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763). These deltas show a consistent lead over the nearest rivals in the database, and they establish the B300 SXM6 AC as a top-tier compute accelerator.

The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile wins in portability and integration. It is an IGP with a slot width of "IGP," meaning it is integrated into a processor package rather than occupying a separate slot. Its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," which confirms its role in mobile systems. Its memory is "System Shared," so it uses system memory rather than dedicated VRAM. The B300 SXM6 AC, by contrast, has "No outputs" and uses an SXM Module slot width. The Intel part also has a 65 W TDP, whereas the B300 SXM6 AC has a 1100 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1500 W. In terms of power efficiency and system integration, the Intel part wins by design, but this is not a performance win.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture, which is part of the Meteor Lake chip. It is a 10 nm part fabricated by Intel. The B300 SXM6 AC uses the Blackwell Ultra architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The B300 SXM6 AC has 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 127.8M per mm². The Intel part has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

The B300 SXM6 AC is a massive chip. It has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. It also includes 592 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with no tensor cores recorded. The B300 SXM6 AC features 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The B300 SXM6 AC's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, while the Intel part's memory clock is listed as "System Shared."

The B300 SXM6 AC has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The Intel part actually has a higher boost clock, but this is meaningless given the massive difference in shading units and memory bandwidth. The B300 SXM6 AC's FP32 throughput is 76.99 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is also 76.99 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part delivers 3.942 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The B300 SXM6 AC is roughly 19.5 times faster in FP32, based on these recorded figures.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile have any benchmark scores recorded in the database?

A: No. The database shows no benchmark entries for the Intel part, and its average benchmark score is 0. The B300 SXM6 AC has one recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831.

Q: How does the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC leads the NVIDIA B200 by 7%, the NVIDIA H200 NVL by 10.4%, the AMD Instinct MI300X by 16.3%, and the NVIDIA L40S by 25% in average benchmark scores.

Q: What memory configuration does each part use?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC uses 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which part has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has a boost clock of 2200 MHz, which is higher than the B300 SXM6 AC's boost clock of 2032 MHz. However, the B300 SXM6 AC has a much higher base clock of 1665 MHz versus 300 MHz.

Q: What is the production status of both parts?

A: Both parts are listed as "Active" in the database. The Intel part was released on 2023-12-13, and the B300 SXM6 AC was released on 2025-09-10.

Q: Does the B300 SXM6 AC support DirectX or OpenGL?

A: No. The database lists its DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support as "N/A." The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no head-to-head benchmark entries in the database for these two parts. The wins count is 0 for both. The only recorded benchmark belongs to the B300 SXM6 AC, which scored 369,831 in Geekbench OpenCL. This score places it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile has no recorded scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

The B300 SXM6 AC's nearest rival comparisons provide context for its score. It is 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891), 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994), and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763). These are substantial margins, and they confirm the B300 SXM6 AC's position at the top of the database's performance distribution.

The Intel part's lack of benchmark data means no direct comparison can be made. The data shows that the Intel part's FP32 throughput is 3.942 TFLOPS, while the B300 SXM6 AC delivers 76.99 TFLOPS. The texture rate difference is similarly large: the Intel part has 123.2 GTexel/s, and the B300 SXM6 AC has 1,202.9 GTexel/s. The pixel rates are closer, with the Intel part at 52.80 GPixel/s and the B300 SXM6 AC at 48.77 GPixel/s, which is notable because the B300 SXM6 AC has far more shading units but the same ROP count of 24.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded specification field.

| Specification | Intel Arc Graphics 112EU Mobile | NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC |

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

| Architecture | Xe-LPG | Blackwell Ultra |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 208,000 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 1628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not recorded | 127.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2032 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 288 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | HBM3e |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 8192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 8.19 TB/s |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 896 | 18,944 |

| TMUs | 56 | 592 |

| ROPs | 24 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | Not recorded | 592 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.80 GPixel/s | 48.77 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 1,202.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.942 TFLOPS | 76.99 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) | 76.99 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 65 W | 1100 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | SXM Module |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 1500 W |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 6.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2023-12-13 | 2025-09-10 |

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-M | Server Hopper |

| Successor | Not recorded | Server Rubin |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 100 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 0 | 369,831 |

The shading unit count difference is the largest single specification gap: the B300 SXM6 AC has 21.1 times more shading units than the Intel part. The FP32 throughput difference is 19.5 times in favor of the B300 SXM6 AC. The memory bandwidth difference is even more extreme, with the B300 SXM6 AC delivering 8.19 TB/s versus the Intel part's system dependent bandwidth. The B300 SXM6 AC also has 592 tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. The B300 SXM6 AC's API support is listed as N/A across the board, reflecting its server-oriented design with no display outputs, while the Intel part supports DirectX 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for client workloads.