Intel Arc Graphics 24EU vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a stark division of roles between these two processors. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU is an integrated graphics solution designed for desktop Arrow Lake-S systems, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a dedicated server accelerator built for data center workloads. Their benchmark results reflect this: the Intel part has a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733, placing it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA B200 has no recorded gaming benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile by default due to its absence from consumer test suites.

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU wins in any consumer-facing graphics workload that relies on DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, or Vulkan 1.4 support. Its 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 6 render output units are configured for rasterization and light compute tasks. The integrated nature of this part means it draws power from the system memory and motherboard, with a 65 W TDP that fits within standard desktop power envelopes. The recorded score of 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 confirms it can handle entry-level gaming and desktop acceleration.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins in raw compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and AI acceleration. With 18,944 shading units, 592 tensor cores, and 592 texture mapping units, this processor is built for parallel workloads that scale across thousands of cores. The 180 GB HBM3e memory with an 8192-bit bus delivers 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, a figure that dwarfs any integrated solution. The FP32 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) indicate this chip is optimized for mixed-precision training and inference tasks. The 1000 W TDP and 1400 W suggested PSU show it is designed for server racks, not desktop cases.

The wins are not overlapping. The Intel part wins where software expects a standard graphics API and where power delivery is constrained. The NVIDIA part wins where compute density, memory capacity, and tensor operations matter more than display output. The NVIDIA B200 has no display outputs, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU outputs are motherboard dependent, meaning the latter can drive monitors while the former cannot.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher recorded benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so a direct comparison is not possible.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory with an 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor supports more graphics APIs?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no API support listed in the database, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked as N/A.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has 192 shading units, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, a 98-fold difference.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has a 65 W TDP and requires no separate power connectors. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W.

Q: Which processor has a higher transistor count?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, while the Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no shared benchmark entries between these two processors. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has one recorded test, 3Dmark Steel Nomad DX12, with a score of 733. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmarks, which means the wins count sits at 0 for each side in head-to-head comparisons.

For the Intel part, the nearest rivals in the database provide context. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 64EU both score 733, matching the 24EU exactly with a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% behind the 24EU. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, which is 2.4% ahead of the 24EU. These deltas indicate that the Arc Graphics 24EU performs at a level comparable to older discrete mobile GPUs, despite being an integrated solution.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no nearest rivals in the database, reflecting its unique position as a server accelerator without consumer benchmark data. Its 50th percentile ranking is a default assignment, not a measured result. The absence of a 3DMark score does not indicate weakness in compute tasks; it simply means the standard consumer benchmark suite does not apply to this class of hardware.

The practical interpretation is that these processors are not competitors. The Intel part delivers 768.0 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 1.536 TFLOPS of FP16 throughput (2:1 ratio), which suits lightweight graphics and media tasks. The NVIDIA part delivers 69.34 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, which is 90 times higher than the Intel part in FP32 and 45 times higher in FP16. The pixel rate difference is also notable: 12.00 GPixel/s for Intel versus 43.92 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. The texture rate gap is even larger: 24.00 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every measurable specification. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU uses a 3 nm process node, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses a 5 nm node. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but the transistor counts diverge sharply: 17,800 million for Intel versus 208,000 million for NVIDIA. Die size follows the same trend: 243 mm² versus 1628 mm².

Clock speeds show an unusual inversion. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The Intel part runs at a higher boost frequency, but this does not compensate for the massive core count difference.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The Intel part uses system shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and bandwidth that depends on the host system. The NVIDIA part uses 180 GB of HBM3e with an 8192-bit bus and a fixed 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

The shading unit count is 192 for Intel versus 18,944 for NVIDIA. Texture mapping units are 12 versus 592. Render output units are 6 versus 24. The NVIDIA part has 592 tensor cores, while the Intel part has none listed. The Intel part has a pixel rate of 12.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 24.00 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part has a pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s.

Form factor and power delivery also separate them. The Intel part is an IGP with a 65 W TDP and no power connectors. The NVIDIA part is an SXM Module with a 1000 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The bus interface is Ring Bus for Intel and PCIe 6.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU is built on the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake) generation. It uses the Arrow Lake-S chip. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is built on the Blackwell architecture, part of the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation, using the GB100 chip.

The Intel architecture prioritizes compatibility with consumer graphics APIs. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA architecture does not list any of these APIs as supported, indicating it is not designed for traditional graphics rendering pipelines.

Cache and tensor capabilities differ fundamentally. The Intel part has no tensor cores listed, meaning it cannot accelerate matrix operations for AI workloads. The NVIDIA part has 592 tensor cores, which are dedicated to deep learning inference and training. The FP16 throughput ratio also reveals the design intent: Intel delivers FP16 at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, suggesting a consumer efficiency trade-off, while NVIDIA delivers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, indicating balanced compute for mixed-precision workloads.

The production status for both is Active. The Intel part was released on 2024-10-23, and the NVIDIA part was released eight days later on 2024-10-31. The Intel part lists its predecessor as HD Graphics. The NVIDIA part lists its predecessor as Server Hopper and its successor as Server Rubin.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no display outputs, which is consistent with a server accelerator that communicates with the host over PCIe 6.0 x16. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU has motherboard dependent display outputs, meaning it can drive monitors through the host platform. The NVIDIA part also lacks any listed power connectors, relying instead on the SXM module interface for power delivery.

The Verdict

The data indicates these are complementary products for different segments, not competitors. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU is for systems that need integrated graphics with modern API support. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 places it in the 3rd percentile, but that score is competitive with its nearest rivals, which include other Intel Arc variants and older discrete mobile GPUs. The 65 W TDP and system shared memory make it suitable for standard desktop platforms.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is for server environments that require massive parallel compute. Its 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 throughput, 180 GB of HBM3e memory, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth position it for AI training and high-performance computing. The 1000 W TDP and SXM module form factor confirm it belongs in a data center, not a workstation. The lack of display outputs and graphics API support means it is not a replacement for any consumer GPU.

Benchmark results do not overlap, so a direct winner cannot be declared from the recorded data. Instead, the evidence shows that each processor wins in its intended domain. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU wins for desktop graphics and media acceleration. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins for server compute and AI workloads. The 50th percentile ranking for the NVIDIA part reflects its absence from consumer benchmarks, not a performance deficit. The 3rd percentile ranking for the Intel part reflects its position among all GPUs, including discrete cards with far more resources.

The specification differences support this split. The Intel part has a higher boost clock but vastly fewer cores. The NVIDIA part has a lower boost clock but 98 times more shading units and 49 times more texture mapping units. The memory bandwidth difference is 8.19 TB/s versus system dependent, which is a difference of several orders of magnitude. The transistor density tells the same story: 73.3M per mm² for Intel versus 127.8M per mm² for NVIDIA, showing that the NVIDIA chip packs more compute into each square millimeter despite using a larger process node.

For system integrators, the choice depends on the workload. Desktop platforms with the Arrow Lake-S chip benefit from the integrated Arc Graphics 24EU, which provides display output and basic 3D acceleration without additional hardware. Server platforms that need tensor operations and massive memory bandwidth require the B200 SXM6, which delivers those capabilities at a much higher power cost. The launch MSRP for the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is 34,999 USD, while the Intel part has no listed launch MSRP.