Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no benchmark entries for either the Intel Arc Pro B370 or the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation. The head-to-head comparison fields are empty, with zero documented wins for either part. This means the quantitative performance relationship between these two mobile graphics solutions cannot be established from the current measurements. What the data does provide is a full specification sheet for each, allowing a structural comparison of their capabilities, but any statement about actual frame rates, compute throughput, or application scaling remains outside the recorded evidence. The percentile ranking for both GPUs is identical at 50, indicating they occupy the same median position in the overall GPU distribution, though this figure reflects the database's current lack of scored runs for either product.

The absence of benchmark data is notable because both are active production parts. The Intel part shipped on January 26, 2026, while the NVIDIA part arrived on March 20, 2023. Their release dates are separated by nearly three years, yet the database has no performance samples for either. This gap means the analysis must rely entirely on architectural and specification differences, not on measured outcomes. The FP32 compute figures are the closest proxy for raw throughput: the RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 24.72 TFLOPS, while the Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. That is a 4.02x difference in favor of the NVIDIA part, a substantial margin that would likely translate into significant performance advantages in compute-heavy workloads, though no benchmark confirms this directly.

Pixel and texture throughput tell a similar story. The RTX 4000 Mobile reaches 133.2 GPixel/s and 386.3 GTexel/s. The Arc Pro B370 reaches 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part is 2.775x faster in pixel fill and 4.024x faster in texture fill. These are theoretical maximums derived from clock speeds and unit counts, not measured results, but they indicate the NVIDIA silicon has a much larger execution footprint. The Arc Pro B370's boost clock of 2400 MHz is higher than the RTX 4000 Mobile's boost of 1665 MHz, yet the NVIDIA part compensates with far more shading units, texture mapping units, and render output units, as detailed in the specification section below.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process node. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process node. Intel's part is an integrated graphics processor, with the bus interface listed as IGP and no power connectors, indicating it resides on the CPU package. The NVIDIA part is also listed as IGP for slot width and power connectors, but its bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, meaning it connects through a dedicated PCI Express link even though it is mounted on a mobile board.

The transistor counts differ dramatically. NVIDIA discloses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². Intel lists its transistor count as unknown and its die size as unknown, so no density figure can be computed. The memory subsystems are entirely dissimilar. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory, with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated VRAM. The RTX 4000 Mobile has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a fundamental architectural split: one relies on the host system's memory pool, the other has its own high-speed frame buffer.

The compute resources scale accordingly. The Arc Pro B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 render output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. The RTX 4000 Mobile has 7424 shading units, 232 texture mapping units, 80 render output units, 58 ray tracing cores, and 232 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 5.8x more shading units, 5.8x more TMUs, 4x more ROPs, and 5.8x more RT cores. The Intel part has no tensor core count listed, while NVIDIA's tensor cores are integral to its Ada Lovelace feature set. The FP16 throughput also diverges: the Arc Pro B370 achieves 12.29 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while the RTX 4000 Mobile achieves 24.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not double-rate FP16 and instead runs it at full FP32 speed.

Power consumption is another major architectural differentiator. The Arc Pro B370 has a 25 W TDP, while the RTX 4000 Mobile has a 110 W TDP. That is a 4.4x difference in power envelope, which reflects the integrated versus discrete design approach. The Intel part's base clock is 300 MHz with a boost of 2400 MHz. The NVIDIA part's base clock is 1290 MHz with a boost of 1665 MHz. The Intel part boosts 735 MHz higher than the NVIDIA part's boost, but the NVIDIA part runs at a much higher base clock, suggesting it maintains consistent performance without relying on boost headroom.

The memory clock for the RTX 4000 Mobile is listed as 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the Arc Pro B370's memory clock is listed as "System Shared". The API support is identical for both: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means software compatibility at the API level is not a differentiator. The production status for both is Active, and neither has a successor listed (the NVIDIA part's successor is Blackwell-MW, but the database does not provide that product's specs).

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B370 have any dedicated video memory?

A: No. The memory size, type, bus width, and clock are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent". It relies entirely on the host system's RAM, with bandwidth varying by platform.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4000 Mobile in raw FP32 compute?

A: The RTX 4000 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS, which is 4.02x the Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS. This is a theoretical peak figure, not a measured benchmark result.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile has a TDP of 110 W. The NVIDIA part consumes 4.4x more power according to the specification data.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature sets are identical, so software compatibility at the API level does not differentiate them.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile has 58 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has 10. The NVIDIA part has 5.8x more RT cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the RTX 4000 Mobile?

A: The RTX 4000 Mobile has 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has system-dependent bandwidth, which cannot be quantified from the database.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node is 3 nm for Intel versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The foundry is Intel for the Arc Pro B370 and TSMC for the RTX 4000 Mobile. The transistor count is unknown for Intel and 35,800 million for NVIDIA. The die size is unknown for Intel and 294 mm² for NVIDIA. The transistor density is null for Intel and 121.8M / mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel base clock is 300 MHz, the NVIDIA base clock is 1290 MHz. The Intel boost clock is 2400 MHz, the NVIDIA boost clock is 1665 MHz. The memory clock is system shared for Intel and 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA. The memory size is system shared for Intel and 12 GB for NVIDIA. The memory type is system shared for Intel and GDDR6 for NVIDIA. The bus width is system shared for Intel and 192 bit for NVIDIA. The bandwidth is system dependent for Intel and 432.0 GB/s for NVIDIA.

The execution unit counts diverge sharply. Shading units: 1280 for Intel, 7424 for NVIDIA. TMUs: 40 for Intel, 232 for NVIDIA. ROPs: 20 for Intel, 80 for NVIDIA. RT cores: 10 for Intel, 58 for NVIDIA. Tensor cores: null for Intel, 232 for NVIDIA. Pixel rate: 48.00 GPixel/s for Intel, 133.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate: 96.00 GTexel/s for Intel, 386.3 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32: 6.144 TFLOPS for Intel, 24.72 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16: 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel, 24.72 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

TDP is 25 W for Intel and 110 W for NVIDIA. The bus interface is IGP for Intel and PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. The release dates are January 26, 2026 for Intel and March 20, 2023 for NVIDIA. The predecessors are HD Graphics-WM for Intel and Ampere-MW for NVIDIA. The successor is null for Intel and Blackwell-MW for NVIDIA. The series is null for Intel and GeForce 40-series for NVIDIA. The chip is Panther Lake for Intel and AD104 for NVIDIA. The architecture is Xe3-LPG for Intel and Ada Lovelace for NVIDIA. The generation is Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) for Intel and Ada-MW for NVIDIA.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation is the substantially more capable part on every computational metric recorded. It has more shading units, more texture units, more ROPs, more ray tracing cores, more tensor cores, higher FP32 throughput, higher FP16 throughput, higher pixel fill, higher texture fill, dedicated high-bandwidth memory, and a higher TDP to support that performance. The Intel Arc Pro B370 counters with a smaller power envelope, a newer process node, a higher boost clock, and system shared memory that simplifies integration.

The choice between them depends on the use case. The RTX 4000 Mobile is designed for workloads that demand maximum compute throughput, ray tracing performance, and dedicated VRAM capacity. The Arc Pro B370 is designed for power-constrained environments where a 25 W envelope is mandatory and the host system's memory can serve as the frame buffer. Neither has benchmark scores in the database, so the verdict rests on specification analysis alone.

The percentile rankings are identical at 50, which is an artifact of the empty benchmark fields rather than a meaningful comparison of performance. The RTX 4000 Mobile's 4.02x FP32 advantage and 4.4x power consumption increase suggest it targets a completely different performance class. The Arc Pro B370's 3 nm process and integrated design point toward efficiency and compactness, not peak throughput. For users who need the highest absolute performance, the NVIDIA part is the clear specification winner. For users who need a low-power integrated solution, the Intel part is the only option that fits that profile.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in compute-heavy scenarios. Its 24.72 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.72 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1) throughput, combined with 232 tensor cores, makes it suited for AI inference, scientific simulation, and content creation tasks that leverage tensor operations. The 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth from 12 GB of GDDR6 provides ample data movement for large datasets and high-resolution textures. The 58 ray tracing cores and 133.2 GPixel/s pixel rate support demanding ray-traced rendering workloads. The 80 ROPs handle high-resolution output with higher fill rates.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in power-constrained and integration-focused scenarios. Its 25 W TDP is less than a quarter of the NVIDIA part's 110 W envelope, making it viable for thin-and-light laptops with limited cooling and battery budgets. The 3 nm process node and integrated design mean no separate memory modules or power delivery components are required. The system shared memory approach eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM, reducing board complexity and cost. The 2400 MHz boost clock is higher than the NVIDIA part's 1665 MHz, which can help in bursty, short-duration workloads where boost clocks matter more than sustained throughput.

The 40 TMUs and 20 ROPs on the Intel part are modest but adequate for basic display output and light 2D workloads. The 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) throughput indicates some compute capability, though at half the rate of the NVIDIA part. The 10 ray tracing cores provide entry-level RT support, but with 5.8x fewer cores than the NVIDIA part, ray-traced performance would be substantially lower. The absence of tensor cores means no dedicated AI acceleration hardware.

The database does not provide benchmark scores to confirm how these theoretical advantages translate into real-world performance. The specification data shows the RTX 4000 Mobile is the dominant part in absolute terms, while the Arc Pro B370 offers a distinct efficiency profile that the NVIDIA part cannot match. The two products serve different segments, and the recorded data supports that conclusion without requiring measured benchmarks.