Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the Intel Arc Pro B370 and the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation contains no individual benchmark results. However, the theoretical and specification data provides a basis for comparing their peak capabilities. The most significant advantage for the NVIDIA part lies in raw compute throughput. The RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 35% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS. This gap indicates a substantial lead for NVIDIA in tasks that scale with raw shader throughput, such as general-purpose GPU compute and unoptimized rendering workloads.

Texture processing follows a similar pattern. The NVIDIA GPU achieves a texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s, while the Intel part reaches 96.00 GTexel/s. This represents a 35% advantage for NVIDIA in fill-rate limited scenarios, which directly impacts the speed of texturing operations in games and 3D applications. The pixel rate also favors NVIDIA, with 64.80 GPixel/s versus Intel's 48.00 GPixel/s, a 35% difference that affects rasterization throughput at high resolutions.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 counters in clock speed and efficiency metrics. Its boost clock of 2400 MHz exceeds the NVIDIA part's 2025 MHz boost clock by 18.5%. This higher clock rate does not translate into a performance win due to the NVIDIA GPU's larger shader array, but it does indicate a different design approach. The Intel chip also operates at a lower 25 W TDP compared to the 35 W TDP of the NVIDIA GPU, a 40% reduction in power draw. This efficiency gap is notable for thermally constrained mobile chassis.

In ray tracing, the NVIDIA part has 16 RT cores versus 10 for Intel, a 60% increase in dedicated hardware. Tensor performance also favors NVIDIA, which has 64 tensor cores while Intel lists none. The FP16 output further highlights the architectural divergence: NVIDIA provides 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while Intel offers 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). Intel's FP16 figure is 48% higher, but the 2:1 ratio indicates it is achieved through rate doubling rather than native throughput, which can affect sustained performance in mixed workloads.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation is the stronger performer in most compute metrics. It leads in FP32, texture rate, pixel rate, ray tracing hardware, and tensor capabilities. The 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 figure and the 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate establish it as the higher-throughput solution. For applications that depend on raw rendering power, CUDA-like compute, or tensor-accelerated features, the NVIDIA part has a clear theoretical advantage.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 positions itself as the efficiency-focused alternative. Its 25 W TDP is 40% lower than NVIDIA's 35 W, and its boost clock of 2400 MHz is higher. The 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 throughput also gives it a peak advantage in scenarios that can utilize rate-doubled half-precision math. This makes it suitable for thin-and-light systems where power draw and heat dissipation are primary constraints.

The missing benchmark scores mean no direct performance percentile can be cited. Both parts share the same 50th percentile rating in the database's global ranking, indicating they are statistically equivalent in overall standing despite their different strengths. Buyers should prioritize NVIDIA for peak compute and feature-rich acceleration, or Intel for lower power consumption and higher clock rates in a thermally limited chassis.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's foundry. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel part has a transistor count listed as unknown, while NVIDIA specifies 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, resulting in a density of 118.9M transistors per mm².

Core configurations differ significantly. The Intel GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units. The NVIDIA GPU has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives NVIDIA 60% more shading units, 60% more TMUs, and 60% more ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also differs: Intel has 10 RT cores, while NVIDIA has 16. Tensor cores are exclusive to NVIDIA, which includes 64 of them; Intel lists no tensor core count.

Memory architecture is a fundamental divergence. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The NVIDIA part has dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for NVIDIA is 2000 MHz at 16 Gbps effective, while Intel's memory clock is listed as system shared. This dedicated memory gives NVIDIA predictable bandwidth, whereas Intel's performance depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

Clock behavior also separates the two. Intel has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, a wide dynamic range that allows for aggressive power saving at idle. NVIDIA has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 2025 MHz, a narrower range that maintains higher minimum performance. The bus interface differs as well: Intel uses an integrated graphics processor (IGP) interface, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both are listed as IGP slot width, meaning neither is a discrete add-in card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 35% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B370's 6.144 TFLOPS.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The NVIDIA part uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent and clock speed also system shared.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a 25 W TDP, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has a 35 W TDP. This is a 40% reduction for Intel.

Q: Do both support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API lists are identical for both parts.

Q: Which has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has 16 RT cores, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 has 10 RT cores. This is a 60% increase for NVIDIA.

Q: What process nodes are used for each chip?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 is built on a 3 nm process at Intel's foundry. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation wins in raw compute and rendering throughput. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32, 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate, and 64.80 GPixel/s pixel rate make it the stronger choice for graphics-intensive tasks such as 3D rendering, video editing with GPU acceleration, and gaming at higher settings. The 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for ray-traced effects and AI-assisted features, which are increasingly common in modern applications. The dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures consistent performance without dependence on system memory speed.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in power efficiency and peak clock speed. Its 25 W TDP is 40% lower than NVIDIA's, making it better suited for ultra-portable devices where battery life and thermal headroom are critical. The 2400 MHz boost clock is 18.5% higher than NVIDIA's 2025 MHz, which can provide responsiveness in lightly threaded or clock-sensitive workloads. The 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 output is 48% higher than NVIDIA's 8.294 TFLOPS, offering an advantage in applications that leverage rate-doubled half-precision math, such as certain AI inference tasks or image processing filters.

The shared memory architecture of the Intel part eliminates the need for a dedicated VRAM pool, which can be beneficial in systems with ample high-speed system memory. The NVIDIA part's fixed 4 GB capacity may become a limitation in memory-heavy workloads, but its dedicated bandwidth is more predictable. The database shows both parts at the same 50th percentile, so neither holds a global standing advantage; the choice depends on whether the workload prioritizes NVIDIA's compute density or Intel's power efficiency.

Specification Differences

| Feature | Intel Arc Pro B370 | NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Panther Lake | AD107 |

| Architecture | Xe3-LPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | unknown | 18,900 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 159 mm² |

| Transistor Density | not listed | 118.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1485 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 2025 MHz |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 40 | 64 |

| ROPs | 20 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 10 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | not listed | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 48.00 GPixel/s | 64.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 96.00 GTexel/s | 129.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 6.144 TFLOPS | 8.294 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) | 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 35 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Release Date | 2026-01-26 | 2024-02-25 |

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-WM | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | not listed | Blackwell-MW |

The NVIDIA part has a higher base clock (1485 MHz vs 300 MHz) and a larger core configuration across all unit counts. The Intel part has a higher boost clock (2400 MHz vs 2025 MHz) and a lower TDP. Memory is the most pronounced difference, with NVIDIA using dedicated GDDR6 and Intel relying on system shared resources. The release dates show Intel's part is newer by approximately two years.