Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA H800 SXM5 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc Pro B370 and NVIDIA H800 SXM5 occupy entirely different segments of the graphics hardware spectrum, and the recorded data confirms they share almost no common ground. The Arc Pro B370 is an integrated graphics processor built on Intel's 3 nm Panther Lake node, designed for portable devices, with a 25 W power envelope and system-shared memory. The H800 SXM5 is a 700 W server module using TSMC's 5 nm process, featuring 80 GB of HBM3 memory, a 5120-bit bus, and 3.36 TB/s of memory bandwidth. Neither part has recorded benchmark scores in the database, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, meaning the comparison must rely on architectural and specification data rather than measured performance. The data indicates that the H800 SXM5 is the dominant compute part, while the Arc Pro B370 serves a fundamentally different role as a low-power integrated solution.

FAQ

Q: What is the most significant architectural difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on Panther Lake silicon at 3 nm, while the NVIDIA H800 SXM5 uses the Hopper architecture with the GH100 chip at 5 nm. The H800 SXM5 integrates 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, whereas the Arc Pro B370's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The Arc Pro B370 relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The H800 SXM5 has 80 GB of HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus, delivering 3.36 TB/s of bandwidth. This is a fundamental difference: one part has no dedicated VRAM, the other has a massive dedicated pool.

Q: Which part has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 delivers 59.30 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 237.2 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (4:1 ratio). The Intel Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The H800 SXM5 is roughly 9.6 times ahead in FP32 and about 19.3 times ahead in FP16.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Arc Pro B370 has a 25 W TDP and uses no power connectors, as it is an integrated graphics processor. The H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP, requires an 8-pin EPS power connector, and the suggested power supply is 1100 W.

Q: What display outputs does each part provide?

A: The Arc Pro B370's display outputs are portable device dependent, meaning they vary by the device in which it is integrated. The H800 SXM5 has no display outputs at all, consistent with its server-oriented role.

Q: Which part supports DirectX and Vulkan?

A: The Arc Pro B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 has no recorded DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database, as it is not designed for client graphics workloads.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B370 is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, which is a low-power graphics microarchitecture designed for integration into Panther Lake processors. The chip itself is manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process node, and the graphics generation is listed as "Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake)." The architecture is designed for efficiency and portability, as evidenced by its integration as an IGP with no power connectors and no dedicated memory. The predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-WM, and the production status is active, with a release date of 2026-01-26.

The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 is built on the Hopper architecture, specifically using the GH100 chip. It is manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process node, and the generation is listed as "Server Hopper (Hxx)." The chip contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The H800 SXM5 is a server-class module, as indicated by its SXM Module slot width and its PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. It has no display outputs, and its predecessor is listed as Server Ada, with Server Blackwell as the successor. Both parts are active in production, but the H800 SXM5 was released on 2023-03-20, nearly three years before the Arc Pro B370.

The two architectures diverge sharply in their feature sets. The Arc Pro B370 includes 10 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a client-oriented graphics solution. The H800 SXM5 has no recorded ray tracing cores, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, and instead includes 528 tensor cores, which are absent from the Arc Pro B370's specification. The H800 SXM5 also has a 4:1 FP16 ratio, indicating a design optimized for mixed-precision compute, whereas the Arc Pro B370's FP16 is 2:1, a more conventional client GPU ratio.

Specification Differences

The table below lists the fields where the two parts differ, based on the database records. The Arc Pro B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operations units. The H800 SXM5 has 16896 shading units, 528 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operations units. The H800 SXM5 has 528 tensor cores; the Arc Pro B370 has none recorded. The Arc Pro B370 has 10 ray tracing cores; the H800 SXM5 has none recorded.

The clock speeds differ substantially. The Arc Pro B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The H800 SXM5 has a base clock of 1095 MHz and a boost clock of 1755 MHz. The memory clocks are not directly comparable, as the Arc Pro B370 uses system-shared memory while the H800 SXM5 uses HBM3 at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective.

The memory configuration is a major differentiator. The Arc Pro B370 has system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. The H800 SXM5 has 80 GB of HBM3, a 5120-bit bus, and 3.36 TB/s of bandwidth. The pixel rates are similar: 48.00 GPixel/s for the Arc Pro B370 versus 42.12 GPixel/s for the H800 SXM5. The texture rates differ: 96.00 GTexel/s for the Arc Pro B370 versus 926.6 GTexel/s for the H800 SXM5.

The power and physical specifications are starkly different. The Arc Pro B370 has a 25 W TDP, is an IGP, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU. The H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP, is an SXM Module, requires an 8-pin EPS connector, and suggests an 1100 W PSU. The bus interfaces are IGP for the Arc Pro B370 and PCIe 5.0 x16 for the H800 SXM5. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the Arc Pro B370 and none for the H800 SXM5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc Pro B370 or the NVIDIA H800 SXM5. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both parts have an average benchmark score of 0. Consequently, there are no direct performance measurements to compare, and the win counts for both parts stand at 0.

The lack of benchmark data means the comparison must be derived from the specification-level differences. The most decisive advantage for the H800 SXM5 is in FP32 throughput: 59.30 TFLOPS versus 6.144 TFLOPS for the Arc Pro B370. This is a 9.6x difference in favor of the NVIDIA part. The FP16 gap is even larger: 237.2 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS, putting the H800 SXM5 at roughly 19.3x the FP16 throughput.

Memory bandwidth further separates the two. The H800 SXM5's 3.36 TB/s bandwidth dwarfs the Arc Pro B370's system-dependent shared memory, which cannot be quantified with a fixed number. The H800 SXM5 also has a massive 80 GB memory pool versus the Arc Pro B370's shared system memory. The shading unit count, 16896 versus 1280, and texture units, 528 versus 40, reinforce the H800 SXM5's compute-oriented design.

The Arc Pro B370 does hold advantages in certain areas. Its pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s is higher than the H800 SXM5's 42.12 GPixel/s. Its boost clock of 2400 MHz exceeds the H800 SXM5's 1755 MHz boost. The Arc Pro B370 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H800 SXM5 has no recorded API support. The 25 W TDP of the Arc Pro B370 is a fraction of the H800 SXM5's 700 W TDP, and the integrated part requires no power connectors or dedicated PSU.

The data presents a clear picture: the H800 SXM5 is a high-throughput compute accelerator with enormous memory resources, while the Arc Pro B370 is a low-power integrated graphics solution with client-oriented features. The absence of benchmark scores means the percentile rankings are identical at 50 for both, but the specification data alone establishes the H800 SXM5 as the significantly more capable compute device. The Arc Pro B370's advantages are limited to efficiency, integration, and client graphics API support, all of which are irrelevant to the H800 SXM5's server workload.