Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile vs Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile or the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0, and the head-to-head benchmark comparison is empty. This means the quantitative comparison must be derived entirely from the specification sheets and architectural data recorded for each product.

The raw compute numbers, however, tell a decisive story. The Arc Pro B60 Dual delivers 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile provides 1.792 TFLOPS. That is a difference of roughly 6.9 times the FP32 output. The pixel rate favors the discrete card similarly: 192.0 GPixel/s versus 28.00 GPixel/s, a 6.9x gap. Texture rate stands at 384.0 GTexel/s against 56.00 GTexel/s, again roughly 6.9x. These ratios are consistent across the three main throughput metrics, indicating the architectural scaling is uniform rather than bottlenecked in any single stage.

The FP16 figures follow the same pattern. The Arc Pro B60 Dual reaches 24.58 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile reaches 3.584 TFLOPS with the same 2:1 ratio. The proportional gap remains identical, which suggests both implementations use the same FP16-to-FP32 conversion efficiency.

Memory bandwidth presents an even larger disparity. The Arc Pro B60 Dual accesses 456.0 GB/s through a 192-bit GDDR6 interface, while the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. No fixed figure exists for the integrated part, but the discrete card's dedicated 24 GB pool with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth represents a fundamentally different memory subsystem. The integrated GPU cannot match dedicated VRAM in either capacity or bandwidth under any realistic system configuration.

Clock speeds also favor the discrete card. The Arc Pro B60 Dual boosts to 2400 MHz with a 2000 MHz base, while the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile boosts to 1750 MHz from a 300 MHz base. The boost delta alone is 650 MHz, or 37% higher on the discrete card. The base clock difference is even more stark: 2000 MHz versus 300 MHz, a 6.7x gap that reflects the power envelope available to each design.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc Pro B60 Dual wins in every measurable compute category. FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, pixel fill rate, texture fill rate, memory bandwidth, memory capacity, and clock speeds all favor the discrete workstation card. The 24 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth enables workloads that simply cannot run on shared-memory integrated graphics. Large model inference, high-resolution rendering, and multi-display output at 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 are all within the discrete card's domain.

The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile wins only in power consumption and physical integration. Its 65 W TDP stands against the Arc Pro B60 Dual's 400 W TDP. The integrated part requires no power connector, no suggested PSU rating, and occupies no expansion slot. The discrete card requires a 1x 16-pin connector, an 800 W suggested PSU, and a dual-slot footprint measuring 300 mm by 110 mm by 40 mm. For portable or space-constrained systems, the integrated GPU is the only viable option despite its far lower performance.

The mobile part also carries an earlier release date of 2023-12-13, while the discrete card launched on 2025-09-04. Neither product has recorded benchmark wins in the database, so the use-case split follows directly from the architectural and specification differences.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Arc Pro B60 Dual in FP32 compute?

A: The Arc Pro B60 Dual delivers 12.29 TFLOPS, while the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile delivers 1.792 TFLOPS. This represents approximately 6.9 times higher FP32 throughput.

Q: What memory configuration does each product use?

A: The Arc Pro B60 Dual uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated VRAM.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Arc Pro B60 Dual has a 400 W TDP, requires a 1x 16-pin power connector, and lists an 800 W suggested PSU. The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has a 65 W TDP and uses no power connector.

Q: Which product supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the Arc Pro B60 Dual supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which is a subset without the full Ultimate feature set.

Q: What process nodes are used for each chip?

A: The Arc Pro B60 Dual uses a 5 nm process from TSMC. The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process from Intel.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each product have?

A: The Arc Pro B60 Dual has 20 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has no recorded ray tracing cores.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The Arc Pro B60 Dual carries 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units. The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile carries 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Each of these is a 5x difference in unit count.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The discrete card runs at 2000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The integrated part runs at 300 MHz base and 1750 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) for the discrete card versus system-shared memory for the integrated part.

The memory bus width is 192 bit for the Arc Pro B60 Dual, while the mobile part uses system-shared memory with no fixed bus width. Bandwidth figures are 456.0 GB/s versus system dependent.

Pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s versus 28.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 384.0 GTexel/s versus 56.00 GTexel/s. FP32 output is 12.29 TFLOPS versus 1.792 TFLOPS. FP16 output is 24.58 TFLOPS versus 3.584 TFLOPS.

Power delivery differs completely. The discrete card has a 400 W TDP, a 1x 16-pin connector, an 800 W suggested PSU, and a dual-slot form factor. The integrated part has a 65 W TDP, no power connector, no suggested PSU, and an IGP slot width.

The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x8 for the discrete card versus Ring Bus for the integrated part. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for the discrete card versus portable-device-dependent outputs for the integrated part.

Dimensions only exist for the discrete card: 300 mm length, 110 mm height, 40 mm width. The integrated part has no recorded dimensions.

The launch MSRP for the Arc Pro B60 Dual is 1,199 USD. The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile uses the Xe-LPG architecture on the Meteor Lake chip, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Arc Pro B60 Dual uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on the BMG-G21 chip, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. The foundry differs as well: Intel for the mobile part, TSMC for the discrete card.

The discrete card's chip contains 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 72.1M per mm². The mobile part has no recorded transistor count, die size, or density figures.

The generation labels differ. The mobile part belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Meteor Lake) generation, while the discrete card belongs to the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. The mobile part lists its predecessor as HD Graphics-M, while the discrete card has no recorded predecessor.

The API support differs in DirectX version. The Arc Pro B60 Dual supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Ray tracing hardware exists only on the discrete card with 20 dedicated RT cores. The mobile part has no recorded RT cores. Neither product lists tensor cores in the database.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The discrete card uses dedicated GDDR6 with a fixed 192-bit bus and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth. The mobile part uses system-shared memory where bandwidth depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

The Verdict

The data indicates a complete performance hierarchy. The Arc Pro B60 Dual outperforms the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile in every recorded compute metric by a factor of approximately 6.9x for FP32, FP16, pixel rate, and texture rate. Memory bandwidth is even more favorable to the discrete card, with 456.0 GB/s dedicated bandwidth versus a system-dependent figure for the integrated part.

The Arc Pro B60 Dual targets workloads that require the 24 GB frame buffer, the 20 ray tracing cores, and the DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set. Its 400 W TDP, dual-slot footprint, and 800 W suggested PSU make it suitable for stationary workstation systems. The launch MSRP of 1,199 USD positions it as a professional-grade product.

The Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile serves the opposite use case. Its 65 W TDP, IGP slot width, and lack of power connectors make it the only option for the portable device segment it was designed for. The 10 nm Intel process and Xe-LPG architecture support the integrated form factor, while the system-shared memory model removes the need for dedicated VRAM.

The percentile ranking for both products sits at 50 in the database, though this reflects the absence of recorded benchmark scores rather than measured performance. The specification data alone settles the comparison. Users requiring maximum throughput, dedicated memory, and ray tracing should select the Arc Pro B60 Dual. Users constrained to integrated graphics in portable devices have no choice but the Arc Graphics 64EU Mobile. The performance gap is approximately 6.9x across the board, and no recorded benchmark data exists to suggest any overlap in capability.