Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile vs Intel Arc Pro B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct benchmark results for either the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile or the Intel Arc Pro B370. The benchmark database shows no head-to-head test scores, no synthetic workload results, and no game frame rate measurements for this pairing. Both GPUs have an average benchmark score of 0 in the database, and their percentile versus all GPUs is identical at 50. This means neither part can be positioned ahead of the other using measured performance data. The absence of scores is itself informative: any performance comparison must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than recorded test outcomes.

What the data does show is a substantial gap in raw compute capabilities between the two. The Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile delivers 1,382.4 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. That is a 4.4x advantage for the B370 in single-precision floating-point work. The B370 also leads in texture rate at 96.00 GTexel/s versus 43.20 GTexel/s for the 48EU part, a 2.2x difference. Pixel rate favors the B370 as well: 48.00 GPixel/s versus 14.40 GPixel/s, a 3.3x gap. These are the largest measurable wins for the B370, and they align with its larger execution resource pool.

The 48EU Mobile does not win any recorded category outright. Its only advantages are structural, not performance-based. It uses a lower boost clock of 1800 MHz versus 2400 MHz on the B370, and it has fewer shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. The B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. The 48EU part has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Across every compute-oriented specification, the B370 holds a clear lead. The FP16 figures reinforce this: the 48EU Mobile reaches 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1), while the B370 reaches 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1), a 4.4x difference identical to the FP32 ratio.

The only area where the 48EU Mobile is not outmatched is power consumption. Its TDP is 28 W, while the B370 is rated at 25 W. The B370 actually consumes 3 W less while delivering far higher throughput. This makes the B370 the more efficient part on paper, though no efficiency benchmark scores exist in the database to confirm real-world behavior.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Arc Pro B370 as the stronger part in every measurable compute category. It has more than three times the shading units, nearly double the texture units, more than double the ROPs, a higher boost clock, and roughly 4.4x the FP32 and FP16 throughput. It also adds 10 RT cores, which the 48EU Mobile lacks entirely. The B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the 48EU Mobile only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). For any workload that depends on shader throughput, texture filtering, pixel fill, or hardware ray tracing, the B370 is the clear choice from the recorded specifications.

The 48EU Mobile is the older part, with a release date of 2023-12-13, while the B370 was released on 2026-01-26. It belongs to the Meteor Lake generation with Xe-LPG architecture, whereas the B370 uses Panther Lake with Xe3-LPG architecture. The 48EU part is built on a 10 nm process, while the B370 is built on a 3 nm process. The process advantage alone explains part of the B370's efficiency and clock headroom. The B370 is rated at 25 W despite its larger execution resources, which suggests the newer node delivers meaningful power efficiency gains.

Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP, so no price-based positioning is possible. Both are listed as Active in production status. The 48EU Mobile is an integrated GPU for mobile platforms with a Ring Bus interface, while the B370 is also an integrated part but uses an IGP bus interface. The B370 predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-WM, while the 48EU predecessor is HD Graphics-M. The B370's successor field is empty, as is the 48EU's.

Architecture Differences

The Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture on the Meteor Lake chip. The Arc Pro B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip. These are different generations of Intel's integrated GPU designs. The 48EU part is part of the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation, while the B370 belongs to Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake). The "WM" designation suggests a workstation-oriented mobile part, while "M" indicates a general mobile part.

The process node difference is significant. The 48EU Mobile is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The B370 moves to a 3 nm process, also at Intel. The smaller node allows for higher transistor density and lower power draw per unit of work. The B370's 3 nm process is a full generation ahead of the 48EU's 10 nm node. This explains how the B370 can offer 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs while staying within a 25 W TDP, compared to the 48EU's 28 W TDP with far fewer resources.

Ray tracing support is a major architectural divider. The B370 includes 10 dedicated RT cores. The 48EU Mobile lists no RT cores at all. This means hardware-accelerated ray tracing is available on the B370 but absent on the 48EU part. Any DirectX 12 Ultimate workload that uses ray tracing will require the B370. The 48EU Mobile's DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level also lacks the DXR and mesh shader features that come with 12_2 support on the B370.

The memory architecture is identical in structure: both use system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width. Neither has dedicated VRAM. The B370's higher compute throughput will be limited by shared memory bandwidth in some scenarios, but the database does not record actual memory bandwidth figures for either part. The 48EU Mobile also uses system shared memory, so both parts face the same fundamental constraint.

Specification Differences

The shading unit count differs substantially: 384 on the 48EU Mobile versus 1280 on the B370. Texture mapping units are 24 versus 40. Render output units are 8 versus 20. The B370 has 10 RT cores; the 48EU has none. Boost clocks are 1800 MHz on the 48EU and 2400 MHz on the B370. Base clocks are identical at 300 MHz for both.

Pixel rate is 14.40 GPixel/s on the 48EU Mobile and 48.00 GPixel/s on the B370. Texture rate is 43.20 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,382.4 GFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS. FP16 compute is 2.765 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 28 W versus 25 W. The B370 has no power connectors listed, while the 48EU has no power connector data either.

DirectX support differs: the 48EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The process node is 10 nm for the 48EU and 3 nm for the B370. The chip is Meteor Lake for the 48EU and Panther Lake for the B370. The architecture is Xe-LPG versus Xe3-LPG. The generation is Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) versus Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake). The bus interface is Ring Bus versus IGP. Release dates are 2023-12-13 for the 48EU Mobile and 2026-01-26 for the B370. The predecessor is HD Graphics-M for the 48EU and HD Graphics-WM for the B370. The 48EU transistor count, die size, and transistor density are not recorded. The B370 lists transistor count and die size as unknown. Neither part has dimensions recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has 1280 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile has 384 shading units.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The 48EU Mobile lists no RT cores, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 includes 10 RT cores.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speed?

A: The 48EU Mobile boosts to 1800 MHz, while the B370 boosts to 2400 MHz.

Q: Which part has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 is built on a 3 nm process, while the 48EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process.

Q: How much larger is the FP32 compute throughput on the B370?

A: The B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 4.4x the 1,382.4 GFLOPS of the 48EU Mobile.

Q: Do both GPUs use dedicated video memory?

A: No. Both use system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and a system shared bus width.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins every recorded performance-related category. It leads in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 compute, FP16 compute, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, RT cores, boost clock, and DirectX feature level. It also has a lower TDP at 25 W versus 28 W, making it the more power-efficient choice on paper. The B370 is the part to select for any workload involving 3D rendering, compute shaders, ray-traced effects, or high-resolution pixel fill. Its 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate position it for demanding mobile workstation tasks. The 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 figure also indicates strong half-precision compute for machine learning inference or similar workloads, though no benchmark data confirms this.

The Intel Arc Graphics 48EU Mobile wins no specification-based categories. Its only distinguishing characteristics are its earlier release date, its 10 nm process node, and its Ring Bus interface. It is the integrated GPU option for Meteor Lake mobile platforms, and it will handle basic graphics output and light 2D workloads. For users constrained to a Meteor Lake platform with no discrete GPU option, the 48EU Mobile is the available choice. Its 14.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 43.20 GTexel/s texture rate are sufficient for desktop composition and video playback, but the data does not support recommending it for compute-heavy or gaming workloads.

The B370's DirectX 12 Ultimate support gives it access to features like DXR ray tracing and mesh shaders, which the 48EU Mobile cannot use. The 10 RT cores on the B370 make it the only one of the two capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The 3 nm process node gives the B370 a manufacturing advantage that likely explains its higher clocks and lower TDP, although the database records no efficiency benchmarks to confirm real-world power draw.

The 48EU Mobile's 28 W TDP is higher than the B370's 25 W TDP, so even the power envelope favors the newer part. The B370 also has a higher boost clock of 2400 MHz versus 1800 MHz, which compounds its resource advantage. Both parts are active in production, so neither is end-of-life. The B370 is the newer release by more than two years, with a release date of 2026-01-26 compared to the 48EU's 2023-12-13.

For mobile workstation users, the B370 is the clear pick from the recorded data. For users on older Meteor Lake platforms, the 48EU Mobile remains the integrated option. The data does not include game benchmarks, so no frame rate comparison is possible. But every recorded compute and specification metric favors the B370, and the architecture gap between Xe-LPG and Xe3-LPG reinforces that result.