Intel Arc Graphics 32EU vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 represent two radically different endpoints in the hardware spectrum. The Intel part is an integrated graphics solution embedded in a desktop processor, while the NVIDIA part is a massive server accelerator. The recorded data shows a complete divergence in purpose, architecture, and measured capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head data is absent from the database, as the two devices have never been tested under the same workload conditions. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a single recorded benchmark result, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no benchmark entries at all. This absence of overlapping tests makes a direct performance comparison impossible from the recorded data.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU scores 733 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This score places it at the 3rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning 97 percent of recorded graphics processors score higher. The nearest rivals in the database provide context for this result. The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU scores 733 points, a 0 percent difference. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU also scores 733 points, again a 0 percent difference. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723 points, which is 1.4 percent behind the 32EU. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751 points, which is 2.4 percent ahead.

These results indicate that the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU delivers performance nearly identical to both its smaller sibling and its larger sibling in the same product family. The 24EU, with fewer execution units, matches the 32EU score exactly. The 64EU, with double the execution units of the 32EU, also matches the score exactly. This pattern suggests that the Steel Nomad workload does not scale with execution unit count in this range, or that the 32EU is constrained by another factor such as memory bandwidth or power limits.

The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark scores. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its nearest rivals list is empty. The percentile field shows 50, but without any actual test data, this value cannot be verified against real performance measurements. The database records no wins for either device in head-to-head comparisons, reflecting the lack of shared test conditions.

Architecture Differences

The two devices use entirely different chip designs. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses the Arrow Lake-S chip built on the Xe-LPG architecture, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) generation. The manufacturing process is 3 nm at TSMC. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip built on the Blackwell architecture, belonging to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. The manufacturing process is 5 nm at TSMC.

Transistor counts differ enormously. The Intel chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 73.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip contains 208,000 million transistors on a 1,628 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip has more than ten times the transistor count and a die more than six times larger. The density difference shows that the NVIDIA design packs transistors more tightly despite using a larger process node.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1,950 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1,830 MHz. The Intel part starts at a higher base frequency, but the boost clocks are relatively close. The NVIDIA part compensates for its lower base clock with vastly more parallel hardware.

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU uses system shared memory. The memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as system dependent. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is listed as 2,000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed. The memory subsystem difference is extreme, with the NVIDIA part providing dedicated high-bandwidth memory versus the Intel part relying on shared system memory.

Shading resources show a massive gap. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The NVIDIA part has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The NVIDIA part also includes 592 tensor cores, while the Intel part has no tensor core count listed. Neither device lists dedicated ray tracing core counts.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products serve completely different markets. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is an integrated graphics processor, listed as an IGP in slot width, with a 65 W thermal design power. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server module, listed as an SXM Module with a 1,000 W thermal design power and a suggested power supply of 1,400 W. The power consumption difference alone, a factor of more than 15, separates them into different deployment scenarios.

The Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface and has motherboard dependent display outputs. The NVIDIA part uses PCIe 6.0 x16 and has no display outputs. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for conventional graphics API workloads.

The release dates are close. The Intel part released on 2024-10-23, and the NVIDIA part released on 2024-10-31. The Intel part has a predecessor listed as HD Graphics-M, while the NVIDIA part has a predecessor listed as Server Hopper and a successor listed as Server Rubin. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD. The Intel part has no launch MSRP listed.

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is appropriate for systems needing basic graphics output on a desktop processor. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is appropriate for server installations requiring massive parallel compute capability. The performance gap, while not directly measured, is implied by the hardware specifications: the NVIDIA part has 74 times more shading units, 37 times more texture mapping units, and 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 998.4 GFLOPS for the Intel part. The NVIDIA part also provides 8.19 TB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth versus system dependent shared memory.

Specification Differences

The two devices differ in nearly every recorded specification field.

Process node: The Intel part uses 3 nm, the NVIDIA part uses 5 nm, both at TSMC.

Transistors: The Intel part has 17,800 million, the NVIDIA part has 208,000 million.

Die size: The Intel part is 243 mm², the NVIDIA part is 1,628 mm².

Transistor density: The Intel part is 73.3 million per mm², the NVIDIA part is 127.8 million per mm².

Base clock: The Intel part is 300 MHz, the NVIDIA part is 120 MHz.

Boost clock: The Intel part is 1,950 MHz, the NVIDIA part is 1,830 MHz.

Memory clock: The Intel part is system shared, the NVIDIA part is 2,000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective.

Memory size: The Intel part is system shared, the NVIDIA part is 180 GB.

Memory type: The Intel part is system shared, the NVIDIA part is HBM3e.

Memory bus width: The Intel part is system shared, the NVIDIA part is 8,192 bit.

Memory bandwidth: The Intel part is system dependent, the NVIDIA part is 8.19 TB/s.

Shading units: The Intel part has 256, the NVIDIA part has 18,944.

Texture mapping units: The Intel part has 16, the NVIDIA part has 592.

Raster output units: The Intel part has 8, the NVIDIA part has 24.

Tensor cores: The Intel part has none listed, the NVIDIA part has 592.

Pixel rate: The Intel part is 15.60 GPixel/s, the NVIDIA part is 43.92 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: The Intel part is 31.20 GTexel/s, the NVIDIA part is 1,083.4 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance: The Intel part is 998.4 GFLOPS, the NVIDIA part is 69.34 TFLOPS.

FP16 performance: The Intel part is 1.997 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, the NVIDIA part is 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Thermal design power: The Intel part is 65 W, the NVIDIA part is 1,000 W.

Suggested power supply: The Intel part has none listed, the NVIDIA part is 1,400 W.

Slot width: The Intel part is IGP, the NVIDIA part is SXM Module.

Bus interface: The Intel part is Ring Bus, the NVIDIA part is PCIe 6.0 x16.

Display outputs: The Intel part is motherboard dependent, the NVIDIA part has no outputs.

DirectX support: The Intel part is 12 Ultimate (12_2), the NVIDIA part is N/A.

OpenGL support: The Intel part is 4.6, the NVIDIA part is N/A.

Vulkan support: The Intel part is 1.4, the NVIDIA part is N/A.

Predecessor: The Intel part is HD Graphics-M, the NVIDIA part is Server Hopper.

Successor: The Intel part has none listed, the NVIDIA part is Server Rubin.

Release date: The Intel part is 2024-10-23, the NVIDIA part is 2024-10-31.

FAQ

Q: What is the benchmark score of the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU scores 733 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. It has no other recorded benchmark results.

Q: Does the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 have any benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the NVIDIA B200 SXM6, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 24EU matches its score at 733 points with a 0 percent difference. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU also matches at 733 points with a 0 percent difference. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723 points, 1.4 percent behind. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751 points, 2.4 percent ahead.

Q: What memory does the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 use?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth with a memory clock of 2,000 MHz and 8 Gbps effective speed.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU has a thermal design power of 65 W. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a thermal design power of 1,000 W and a suggested power supply of 1,400 W.

Q: What graphics APIs does each device support?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU wins in scenarios requiring low power consumption. Its 65 W thermal design power is minimal compared to the NVIDIA part. It also wins in scenarios requiring display output, as it provides motherboard dependent display outputs while the NVIDIA part has none. The Intel part supports standard graphics APIs, making it suitable for conventional rendering workloads. Its higher base clock of 300 MHz versus 120 MHz also gives it an advantage in lightly threaded tasks that rely on clock speed rather than parallel throughput.

The Intel part wins in scenarios where a dedicated graphics card is not needed. Its IGP slot width and Ring Bus interface indicate it is built into a processor package. Systems using this part do not require a separate graphics card for basic display functionality. The recorded benchmark score of 733, while low in the overall percentile ranking, still provides functional graphics capability.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins in scenarios requiring extreme parallel compute. Its 18,944 shading units and 592 tensor cores provide massive throughput. The FP32 performance of 69.34 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part's 998.4 GFLOPS. The FP16 performance of 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, versus the Intel part's 1.997 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, indicates the NVIDIA part handles half-precision workloads at full rate.

The NVIDIA part wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. The 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus delivers 8.19 TB/s, while the Intel part depends on system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The 1,083.4 GTexel/s texture rate and 43.92 GPixel/s pixel rate also exceed the Intel part's 31.20 GTexel/s and 15.60 GPixel/s.

The NVIDIA part wins in server deployment scenarios. Its PCIe 6.0 x16 bus interface, SXM Module slot width, and lack of display outputs indicate it is designed for compute clusters. The suggested power supply of 1,400 W reflects the infrastructure requirements of a data center environment. The predecessor and successor entries, Server Hopper and Server Rubin, place it in a product line aimed at server accelerators.

The data presents a clear picture. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU is a low-power integrated solution for desktop systems. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a high-power server accelerator for compute workloads. The absence of overlapping benchmarks means no direct comparison exists, but the specification differences make the intended use cases unambiguous.