Intel Arc Graphics 64EU vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU?

A: It is an integrated graphics processor from Intel, part of the Arc Graphics (Arrow Lake) generation, built on the Xe-LPG architecture using a 3 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1900 MHz, and it uses system shared memory.

Q: What is the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC?

A: It is a server-class accelerator from NVIDIA, based on the GB110 chip and the Blackwell Ultra architecture. It uses a 5 nm process, has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz, and comes with 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus.

Q: Which device has a higher benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC records an average benchmark score of 369831 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU scores 733 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 3rd percentile.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database shows the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is tied with the Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU at 733 points each. It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and 2.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M.

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

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200, 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL, 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X, and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S.

Q: What are the power requirements of each device?

A: The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has a TDP of 65 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP). The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W and a suggested power supply of 1500 W; it is an SXM module.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU and the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC represent two entirely different classes of hardware, and their architectural choices reflect that gap. The Intel part is an integrated GPU built on the Xe-LPG architecture, part of the Arrow Lake-S chip, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA part is a discrete server accelerator using the Blackwell Ultra architecture, built on the GB110 chip, also fabricated at TSMC but on a 5 nm process. The Intel chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip contains 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die. Transistor density favors the NVIDIA part at 127.8M per mm² versus 73.3M per mm² for Intel.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC 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 in the database.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The Intel GPU uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, and its memory clock is listed as "System Shared". The NVIDIA accelerator has 288 GB of HBM3e memory, an 8192-bit bus, and 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, with a memory clock of 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The bus interface also differs: Intel uses a Ring Bus, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 6.0 x16. The Intel part has motherboard-dependent display outputs, while the NVIDIA part has no display outputs at all.

Clock behavior differs in direction as well. The Intel GPU boosts from 300 MHz to 1900 MHz, a 1600 MHz range. The NVIDIA part boosts from 1665 MHz to 2032 MHz, a much narrower 367 MHz range. The NVIDIA part compensates with far more compute units. The Intel part lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API support; the NVIDIA part lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its server-oriented compute focus. The Intel part was released on 2024-10-23, while the NVIDIA part was released on 2025-09-10.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates two separate performance domains. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is an integrated solution for client systems, drawing 65 W and using system shared memory. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 733 places it in the 3rd percentile of all GPUs, which situates it among entry-level integrated graphics. The nearest rivals in the database are other Intel integrated parts (the 32EU and 24EU at identical 733 scores) and older discrete mobile GPUs like the AMD Radeon HD 6470M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M. This places the Intel part in a narrow band: 1.4% ahead of the AMD part, 2.4% behind the NVIDIA part.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC operates in a completely different tier. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 369831 puts it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs, meaning the database records no GPU scoring higher. The nearest rivals are the NVIDIA B200 (7% behind), the NVIDIA H200 NVL (10.4% behind), the AMD Instinct MI300X (16.3% behind), and the NVIDIA L40S (25% behind). This device is clearly positioned for server and datacenter workloads, where compute throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth matter more than display output or power efficiency.

The Intel part wins in power efficiency by design. Its 65 W TDP is a fraction of the NVIDIA part's 1100 W, and it requires no external power connector, no suggested PSU, and no discrete module slot. The NVIDIA part requires a 1500 W suggested PSU and an SXM module form factor. The Intel part also supports display outputs (motherboard dependent), while the NVIDIA part has none. For client systems with integrated graphics needs, the Intel part is the only one of the two that fits.

The NVIDIA part wins on raw compute in every measurable category. Its FP32 throughput of 76.99 TFLOPS is roughly 39.6 times the Intel part's 1.946 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s is roughly 19.8 times the Intel part's 60.80 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 48.77 GPixel/s is 60.4% higher than the Intel part's 30.40 GPixel/s. Memory capacity and bandwidth are not comparable because the Intel part uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA part has 288 GB of HBM3e at 8.19 TB/s.

Specification Differences

The two devices differ on nearly every specification field in the database. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU uses the Xe-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses the Blackwell Ultra architecture on a 5 nm process with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die. Transistor density is 73.3M per mm² for Intel and 127.8M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ: Intel runs at 300 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost; NVIDIA runs at 1665 MHz base and 2032 MHz boost. Memory is system shared for Intel, while NVIDIA has 288 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel memory clock is listed as "System Shared"; the NVIDIA memory clock is 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective).

Compute unit counts differ substantially. Intel has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. NVIDIA has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. NVIDIA also has 592 tensor cores; Intel lists none. Pixel rate is 30.40 GPixel/s for Intel versus 48.77 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 60.80 GTexel/s versus 1,202.9 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 1.946 TFLOPS versus 76.99 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput is 3.891 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel versus 76.99 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

Power and form factor differ completely. Intel is an IGP with a 65 W TDP, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and a Ring Bus interface. NVIDIA is an SXM module with a 1100 W TDP, a suggested PSU of 1500 W, and a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for Intel and absent for NVIDIA. API support: Intel lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; NVIDIA lists N/A for all three. Release dates are 2024-10-23 for Intel and 2025-09-10 for NVIDIA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one benchmark for each device, but they are different tests. The Intel Arc Graphics 64EU was measured with 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, scoring 733. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC was measured with Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 369831. Because the tests differ, a direct numerical comparison is not possible, but the percentile data places them at opposite ends of the distribution: Intel at the 3rd percentile, NVIDIA at the 100th percentile.

The Intel part's nearest rival comparison shows a tightly clustered group. The Intel Arc Graphics 32EU and Intel Arc Graphics 24EU each score 733, identical to the 64EU. The AMD Radeon HD 6470M scores 723, which is 1.4% behind the Intel 64EU. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M scores 751, which is 2.4% ahead. This cluster indicates that the Intel 64EU's performance level is essentially at parity with its smaller EU variants and with decade-old discrete mobile GPUs.

The NVIDIA part's nearest rival comparison shows a different pattern. The NVIDIA B200 scores 345482, which is 7% behind the B300 SXM6 AC. The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334891, 10.4% behind. The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317994, 16.3% behind. The NVIDIA L40S scores 295763, 25% behind. The B300 SXM6 AC leads all of these by a wide margin, and its 100th percentile status indicates it is the top performer in the database.

The compute throughput figures reinforce the hierarchy. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC delivers 76.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU delivers 1.946 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part's FP16 performance is also 76.99 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part achieves 3.891 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The texture rate difference is similarly stark: 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 60.80 GTexel/s. The pixel rate gap is smaller but still clear: 48.77 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s.

The benchmark results indicate that the Intel Arc Graphics 64EU is positioned for basic 3D rendering and display output in client systems, while the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is positioned for maximum compute throughput in server environments. The recorded data shows no overlap in their performance envelopes, and the nearest rivals for each device confirm that they occupy separate tiers of the GPU landscape.