Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the two products compared here?

A: The comparison covers the Intel Arc Pro B370, an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture with the Panther Lake chip, and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM, an integrated GPU built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip.

Q: How do their manufacturing processes differ?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 is fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses a 5 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA die measures 382 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded in the database.

Q: What are the core specifications of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 render output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM features 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores.

Q: How much memory does each GPU use?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the clock speeds for each part?

A: The Intel GPU runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz, with memory clocked at 1067 MHz or 8.5 Gbps effective.

Q: What API support does each GPU offer?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has no API support recorded for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, all listed as N/A.

The Verdict

The recorded data places both GPUs at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with identical average benchmark scores of zero. The Intel Arc Pro B370 offers a complete API stack with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists no API compatibility. For software environments relying on established graphics APIs, the Intel part is the only viable option based on this data.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM, however, dominates in raw compute resources. It carries four times the shading units, eight times the texture mapping units, double the render output units, four times the ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores where Intel has none recorded. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is roughly four times the 6.144 TFLOPS of the Intel part. Users prioritizing raw number-crunching capability would select the NVIDIA GPU, provided their software does not require the APIs that Intel supports.

The Intel GPU runs at 25 W TDP, while the NVIDIA TDP is not recorded. Both use internal graphics processor (IGP) form factors, neither uses power connectors, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database. The data cannot support a recommendation based on price, thermal design, or measured benchmark performance, since no head-to-head benchmarks exist and both GPUs have zero average scores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table is empty in the database, with zero wins recorded for either product. This means no direct performance comparisons exist between the Intel Arc Pro B370 and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. The analysis must rely on derived specifications and theoretical throughput figures.

The FP32 compute differential is stark. The NVIDIA part delivers 24.02 TFLOPS against 6.144 TFLOPS for Intel, a ratio of roughly 3.9 to 1. FP16 performance tells a similar story: NVIDIA sustains 24.02 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while Intel reaches 12.29 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA GPU maintains full-rate FP16, whereas the Intel implementation halves its rate for that precision.

Texture throughput favors NVIDIA heavily. The N1X 40SM reaches 750.7 GTexel/s, compared to 96.00 GTexel/s for the Arc Pro B370. Pixel throughput also leans NVIDIA, with 93.84 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s. These figures reflect the larger TMU and ROP counts on the NVIDIA side.

Clock behavior is notable. The Intel part boosts to 2400 MHz, slightly above the NVIDIA boost of 2346 MHz, but it starts at a much lower 300 MHz base. The NVIDIA base clock of 741 MHz is over twice the Intel base. The database does not record sustained clock behavior, so real-world frequency interpretation remains limited.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors NVIDIA. The N1X 40SM provides 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit LPDDR5X interface, while the Intel part relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA memory capacity of 128 GB dwarfs the shared-memory allocation of the Intel GPU, though the Intel approach can dynamically use available system RAM.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm Intel process, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses Blackwell 2.0 on a 5 nm TSMC process. The NVIDIA die area is 382 mm²; the Intel die size is unknown.

Shading units stand at 1280 for Intel versus 5120 for NVIDIA. Texture mapping units are 40 versus 320. Render output units are 20 versus 40. Ray tracing cores are 10 versus 40. Tensor cores are not recorded for Intel but number 160 for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ, with Intel at 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, and NVIDIA at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. Memory configurations are entirely different: Intel uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while NVIDIA has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus at 273.2 GB/s.

The bus interface differs. Intel uses an internal graphics processor connection, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for Intel and 1x HDMI for NVIDIA. Power consumption is 25 W for Intel, with no TDP recorded for NVIDIA. Both use IGP slot widths and no power connectors.

API support shows the largest qualitative gap. Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists N/A for all three API categories. Release dates differ by roughly four months, with Intel launching on January 26, 2026, and NVIDIA on May 31, 2026.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B370 belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM generation built on the Panther Lake chip, using the Xe3-LPG architecture. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM belongs to the Blackwell IGP generation for the N1x platform, built on the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture. These represent two different design philosophies: Intel integrates graphics into a 3 nm process at its own foundry, while NVIDIA uses a 5 nm TSMC process.

The Intel design uses 1280 shading units with 10 ray tracing cores and no recorded tensor cores. Its FP16 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio suggests a consumer-oriented or general-purpose compute focus rather than dedicated AI acceleration. The NVIDIA design packs 5120 shading units, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores, with FP16 running at 24.02 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The presence of tensor cores and full-rate FP16 indicates an architecture weighted toward AI and high-throughput compute workloads.

Memory architecture diverges completely. Intel relies on system shared memory, which means the GPU draws from the host's RAM, and bandwidth is system dependent. NVIDIA integrates 128 GB of LPDDR5X directly, with a fixed 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This gives NVIDIA a dedicated, predictable memory subsystem, while Intel's performance depends on the host platform.

The API situation reflects a major architectural split. Intel implements a full modern graphics API stack, including DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists no API support at all. This may indicate a compute-focused design or a platform where software uses proprietary access methods, but the database records no supported graphics APIs for the NVIDIA part.

Both GPUs are integrated parts with no power connectors and IGP slot widths. Intel lists a 25 W TDP, while NVIDIA does not record a TDP. Neither has a suggested PSU in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in software compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which covers mainstream gaming and graphics workloads. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has no recorded API support, so any application relying on standard graphics interfaces would favor the Intel part. The Intel GPU also holds a slight boost clock advantage at 2400 MHz versus 2346 MHz, and its lower 300 MHz base clock could indicate a more power-conscious idle state at 25 W TDP.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins in raw compute. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is nearly four times the Intel figure, and its 24.02 TFLOPS FP16 performance doubles the Intel FP16 rate while maintaining a 1:1 ratio. The 160 tensor cores provide dedicated AI acceleration hardware that the Intel part lacks entirely. Texture and pixel throughput are substantially higher: 750.7 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s, and 93.84 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s.

Memory capacity and bandwidth favor NVIDIA decisively. The 128 GB LPDDR5X pool at 273.2 GB/s provides predictable performance, while Intel's system shared memory leaves bandwidth dependent on the host. For large datasets or workloads that fit within the dedicated memory, the NVIDIA part has a clear structural advantage.

The NVIDIA GPU also doubles the ray tracing core count at 40 versus 10, and quadruples the shading units at 5120 versus 1280. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface on the NVIDIA part enables faster host communication than the Intel IGP connection, though the Intel bus is integrated by design.

The data supports a split verdict. The Intel Arc Pro B370 suits environments where graphics API compatibility and low power at 25 W matter most. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM suits compute-heavy tasks that can use its tensor cores, large memory pool, and high FP32 and FP16 throughput. Without head-to-head benchmark results, these structural differences define the selection criteria.