Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation as the stronger mobile GPU for compute-heavy and graphics-intensive workloads, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 serves as a power-efficient integrated solution for thin-and-light systems. The RTX 1000 leads decisively in raw throughput, memory bandwidth, and feature count, with roughly 1.69 times the FP32 performance and 2.5 times the texture rate of the Arc Pro B370. The Intel part counters with a lower 25 W TDP versus 35 W, a smaller process node at 3 nm versus 5 nm, and a more recent release date of 2026-01-26 versus 2024-02-25. Users who need maximum mobile graphics performance from the data should target the RTX 1000; users who prioritize an integrated, low-power solution with shared system memory should consider the Arc Pro B370.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and use entirely different architectures. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process by Intel, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation. The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process by TSMC, and belongs to the Ada-MW (x000A) generation.

Transistor and die data reveal a major gap in physical implementation. The RTX 1000 integrates 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.9M per mm². The Arc Pro B370 has unknown transistor count and die size in the database, so direct density comparison is not possible. However, the process node difference (3 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA) suggests the Intel part uses a more advanced manufacturing process despite its lower power envelope.

Core counts differ substantially. The Arc Pro B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. The RTX 1000 has 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part doubles the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, and doubles the ray tracing core count, while also adding tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely. Tensor cores enable AI-accelerated workloads, a feature absent from the Arc Pro B370's specification list.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with a system shared type, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth. The RTX 1000 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. This means the NVIDIA part has dedicated, high-bandwidth memory, while the Intel part relies on the host system's memory, making its bandwidth variable and dependent on the platform. The RTX 1000's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, whereas the Arc Pro B370's memory clock is listed as system shared.

API support is identical, with both parts listing DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use the IGP slot width, have no power connectors, and have portable device dependent display outputs. The bus interface differs: the Arc Pro B370 uses IGP, while the RTX 1000 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The production status for both is active.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 1000 wins in nearly every measurable performance category. Its FP32 compute of 10.37 TFLOPS more than doubles the Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS. FP16 compute also favors NVIDIA: the RTX 1000 delivers 10.37 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part delivers 12.29 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. The raw FP16 number for Intel is higher, but the 2:1 ratio indicates it achieves that figure through packed arithmetic, whereas the RTX 1000 maintains full-rate FP16. Pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 97.20 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors NVIDIA at 162.0 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a mixed story. The Arc Pro B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, while the RTX 1000 has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 2025 MHz. The Intel part has a higher boost ceiling, but the NVIDIA part has a much higher base clock, which indicates sustained performance under load is likely better on the RTX 1000, given its dedicated memory and higher TDP.

The Intel part wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is 10 W lower than the RTX 1000's 35 W TDP. The 3 nm process node suggests a more advanced manufacturing approach. The release date of 2026-01-26 for Intel versus 2024-02-25 for NVIDIA means the Arc Pro B370 is a newer design by roughly two years. The Arc Pro B370 also uses system shared memory, which eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM and can reduce system cost and complexity, though it sacrifices bandwidth predictability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 10.37 TFLOPS FP32, which is significantly higher than the Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA part also leads in pixel rate (97.20 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (162.0 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s).

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX 1000 uses 6 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory, meaning its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all depend on the host system. The RTX 1000's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, while the Arc Pro B370's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Q: Which GPU has a lower power draw?

A: The Arc Pro B370 has a 25 W TDP, while the RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has a 35 W TDP. The Intel part draws 10 W less power, making it more suitable for lower-power integrated systems.

Q: What are the architectural differences?

A: The Arc Pro B370 uses Intel's Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip, built on a 3 nm process. The RTX 1000 uses NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD107 chip, built on a 5 nm process by TSMC. The RTX 1000 includes 80 tensor cores for AI workloads, while the Arc Pro B370 has no tensor cores listed.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Both GPUs support ray tracing. The Arc Pro B370 has 10 ray tracing cores, while the RTX 1000 has 20 ray tracing cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the difference in release timing?

A: The Arc Pro B370 has a release date of 2026-01-26, while the RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has a release date of 2024-02-25. The Intel part is a newer product by approximately two years. The RTX 1000's predecessor is the Ampere-MW, and its successor is the Blackwell-MW, while the Arc Pro B370's predecessor is the HD Graphics-WM.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two GPUs, with zero wins recorded for each side and an empty head-to-head benchmark array. However, the specification data provides clear performance indicators. The RTX 1000's FP32 throughput of 10.37 TFLOPS is approximately 1.69 times the Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS, a substantial lead for compute workloads such as rendering, simulation, and general-purpose GPU computing.

Texture rate favors NVIDIA by a wide margin. The RTX 1000 achieves 162.0 GTexel/s, which is 1.69 times the Arc Pro B370's 96.00 GTexel/s. This translates to faster texel processing in graphics-heavy applications, including games and 3D rendering. Pixel rate follows the same pattern: the RTX 1000 delivers 97.20 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s, giving NVIDIA a 2.02 times advantage in pixel fill rate. This means the RTX 1000 can output nearly twice as many pixels per second, which benefits high-resolution displays and complex scene composition.

Ray tracing core count doubles from 10 on the Arc Pro B370 to 20 on the RTX 1000. The RTX 1000 also includes 80 tensor cores, enabling AI-accelerated features such as deep learning super sampling and neural network processing, capabilities not listed for the Intel part. In ray-traced workloads, the NVIDIA part's higher core count and dedicated memory likely provide a meaningful advantage, though exact benchmark numbers are not recorded.

Memory bandwidth is a decisive differentiator. The RTX 1000's dedicated GDDR6 memory provides 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Arc Pro B370's bandwidth is system dependent, meaning it varies with the host platform's memory configuration. For memory-intensive workloads, the NVIDIA part's fixed, high-bandwidth memory is a clear advantage. The 6 GB capacity also exceeds what a shared memory configuration might allocate for graphics in typical systems.

Clock behavior differs between the two. The Arc Pro B370 boosts to 2400 MHz, which is 375 MHz higher than the RTX 1000's 2025 MHz boost. However, the RTX 1000's base clock of 1485 MHz is nearly five times the Arc Pro B370's 300 MHz base clock. This suggests the NVIDIA part maintains higher sustained clocks under load, while the Intel part relies on aggressive boost behavior from a very low idle baseline. The 35 W TDP of the RTX 1000 versus 25 W for the Arc Pro B370 supports this interpretation, as higher power allowance enables sustained performance.

Both GPUs share identical API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means software compatibility is equivalent across both parts. Both are classified as active production status and use IGP slot width with no power connectors. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both, meaning they rely on the host device's display connections.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, while the RTX 1000 uses the AD107 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture. Process nodes differ: 3 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The foundry differs: Intel for the Arc Pro B370 versus TSMC for the RTX 1000. Transistor count is 18,900 million for the RTX 1000, while the Arc Pro B370's transistor count is unknown. Die size is 159 mm² for the RTX 1000, while the Arc Pro B370's die size is unknown. Transistor density for the RTX 1000 is 118.9M per mm², while the Arc Pro B370 has no recorded density.

Clock specifications show different base and boost behavior. The Arc Pro B370 has a 300 MHz base clock and 2400 MHz boost clock. The RTX 1000 has a 1485 MHz base clock and 2025 MHz boost clock. Memory clock: the Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory, while the RTX 1000 runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

Memory configuration diverges completely. The Arc Pro B370 has system shared size, type, bus width, and system dependent bandwidth. The RTX 1000 has 6 GB GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units: 1280 for Intel versus 2560 for NVIDIA. TMUs: 40 versus 80. ROPs: 20 versus 48. Ray tracing cores: 10 versus 20. Tensor cores: none listed for Intel versus 80 for NVIDIA.

Pixel rate: 48.00 GPixel/s for the Arc Pro B370 versus 97.20 GPixel/s for the RTX 1000. Texture rate: 96.00 GTexel/s versus 162.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 6.144 TFLOPS versus 10.37 TFLOPS. FP16 performance: 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel versus 10.37 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA. TDP: 25 W versus 35 W. Bus interface: IGP for Intel versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA. Release date: 2026-01-26 for Intel versus 2024-02-25 for NVIDIA. Predecessor: HD Graphics-WM for Intel versus Ampere-MW for NVIDIA. Successor: none listed for Intel versus Blackwell-MW for NVIDIA.

The RTX 1000's transistor density of 118.9M per mm² on a 5 nm process indicates a dense, mature design. The Arc Pro B370's unknown transistor and die data prevent direct comparison, but its 3 nm process and 25 W TDP indicate a design focused on power efficiency within an integrated package. The RTX 1000's dedicated 6 GB GDDR6 memory and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a fixed performance baseline, while the Arc Pro B370's system dependent memory makes its performance variable across platforms. Both GPUs share identical API support and production status, but the RTX 1000 offers higher raw performance across all measured throughput metrics, while the Arc Pro B370 offers a newer, lower-power integrated alternative.