Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Comparison

Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation

The Intel Arc Pro B370 and NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation occupy opposite ends of the graphics hardware spectrum, and the recorded data confirms this split. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 175,286 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 194,041, with an average benchmark score of 184,664. This places it in the 98th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Arc Pro B370 has no recorded benchmark scores, sits in the 50th percentile, and holds an average benchmark score of 0. The comparison is therefore not a contest of equal competitors; it is an examination of how a low-power integrated processor stacks up against a dedicated workstation-class accelerator with a 250 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark runs between the Intel Arc Pro B370 and the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation. The Arc Pro B370 has zero entries in its benchmark list, meaning there are no Geekbench scores, no compute results, and no graphics tests to compare directly. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation, by contrast, has two recorded scores: 175,286 in Geekbench OpenCL and 194,041 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Vulkan score is 10.7% higher than the OpenCL score for the same GPU, indicating that the Ada Lovelace architecture responds well to Vulkan's explicit control model in the recorded workloads.

Because the Arc Pro B370 lacks any benchmark data, the head-to-head comparison must rely on the RTX 5000 Ada Generation's position relative to its own nearest rivals. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation sits 0.5% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB, which scores 183,725. It trails the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB by 1.3%, that rival scoring 187,147. Against the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 1.4% ahead, with the Blackwell card scoring 182,109. Finally, the RTX 5000 Ada Generation leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 D by 3.7%, as that card records 178,050. These deltas are narrow, all within 3.7 percentage points, which suggests the RTX 5000 Ada Generation delivers compute performance comparable to the A100 family and the newest Blackwell workstation parts, despite being built on an older architecture.

The absence of any Arc Pro B370 scores means the database cannot show a single instance where the Intel part wins a benchmark. Every recorded metric belongs to the NVIDIA card. The wins count for the head-to-head section is 0 for the Arc Pro B370 and 0 for the RTX 5000 Ada Generation, reflecting that no direct comparison tests exist. The practical interpretation is straightforward: the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is the only one of the two with measurable performance data, and that data places it at the top tier of the database's GPU rankings.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share no architectural foundation. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. Its chip is codenamed Panther Lake, and it belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm process node, fabricated by TSMC. Its chip is the AD102, and it belongs to the Workstation Ada generation. The process node difference, 3 nm versus 5 nm, gives Intel a density advantage in principle, though the database lists the Arc Pro B370's transistor count and die size as unknown. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 125.3 million transistors per square millimeter.

The shading engine disparity is massive. The Arc Pro B370 has 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 raster operation units, and 10 ray tracing cores. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 12,800 shading units, 400 texture mapping units, 176 ROPs, and 100 ray tracing cores. That is exactly 10 times the shading units, 10 times the texture units, 8.8 times the ROPs, and 10 times the ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card also includes 400 tensor cores, while the Intel part lists none. The arithmetic rates reflect this gap: the Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the RTX 5000 Ada Generation delivers 65.28 TFLOPS FP32 and 65.28 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card is 10.6 times faster in FP32 and 5.3 times faster in FP16.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM, no dedicated bus width, and bandwidth described as system dependent. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the NVIDIA card is 2250 MHz, which translates to 18 Gbps effective. The Intel part's memory clock is also system shared, meaning it depends entirely on the host platform's memory subsystem.

Clock speeds differ in both direction and magnitude. The Arc Pro B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has a base clock of 1155 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz. The Intel part starts much lower but boosts to within 6.25% of the NVIDIA boost clock, which is remarkable given the 10x difference in shading units and the 25 W versus 250 W TDP. The pixel rate for the Arc Pro B370 is 48.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation achieves 448.8 GPixel/s and 1,020.0 GTexel/s, which are 9.35 times and 10.6 times higher, respectively.

The form factors could not be more different. The Arc Pro B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no slot width, no power connectors, and a bus interface of IGP. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long (10.5 inches) and 112 mm high (4.4 inches), requiring a single 16-pin power connector and a suggested 600 W power supply. It connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Intel part uses the integrated bus. Display outputs on the Arc Pro B370 are described as portable device dependent, whereas the RTX 5000 Ada Generation provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench Vulkan score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 194,041. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has no recorded Geekbench scores in the database.

Q: What is the FP32 compute throughput difference?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada Generation delivers 65.28 TFLOPS FP32, while the Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA card is 10.6 times faster in FP32.

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

A: No. The Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory for both size and type, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 32 GB of GDDR6 with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How does the RTX 5000 Ada Generation compare to the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 184,664, which is 1.4% higher than the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell's average score of 182,109.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 250 W.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 100 ray tracing cores. The Arc Pro B370 has 10 ray tracing cores.

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 5000 Ada Generation. Transistor count is unknown for the Intel part, while the NVIDIA card has 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die. The base clock is 300 MHz versus 1155 MHz. The boost clock is 2400 MHz versus 2550 MHz. Memory size is system shared versus 32 GB. Memory type is system shared versus GDDR6. Bus width is system shared versus 256 bit. Bandwidth is system dependent versus 576.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 1,280 versus 12,800. TMUs are 40 versus 400. ROPs are 20 versus 176. Ray tracing cores are 10 versus 100. Tensor cores are not listed for Intel but number 400 for NVIDIA. Pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s versus 448.8 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s versus 1,020.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 6.144 TFLOPS versus 65.28 TFLOPS. FP16 is 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 65.28 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP is 25 W versus 250 W. Slot width is IGP versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU is not listed for Intel but is 600 W for NVIDIA. Bus interface is IGP versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Intel part has no physical dimensions listed, while the NVIDIA card measures 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height. Release dates differ by roughly two and a half years: the Arc Pro B370 launched on 2026-01-26, and the RTX 5000 Ada Generation launched on 2023-08-08. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-WM, and the NVIDIA card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere. The successor for the NVIDIA card is Blackwell PRO W, while the Intel part has no listed successor. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature set is identical.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation wins in every category where the database has recorded data. It has the only benchmark scores, the only memory bandwidth figure, the only transistor count, and the only tensor core count. Its 98th percentile ranking among all GPUs, based on an average score of 184,664, places it in the top tier of the database. The nearest rival comparisons show it is competitive with the A100 SXM4 80 GB (0.5% ahead), the A100 SXM4 40 GB (1.3% behind), the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell (1.4% ahead), and the RTX 4090 D (3.7% ahead). This makes it a strong choice for compute-heavy workloads that respond to OpenCL and Vulkan, as evidenced by its two recorded scores.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 25 W TDP is one-tenth of the NVIDIA card's 250 W, and its IGP form factor requires no power connectors, no PCIe slot, and no dedicated cooling solution beyond what the host device provides. The 3 nm process node indicates a modern manufacturing approach, and the 300 MHz base clock with 2400 MHz boost shows it can scale to a reasonable frequency despite its low power envelope. For portable devices, the display output being portable device dependent means it can be used in systems where a discrete card cannot fit. The Arc Pro B370 also has a 10% share of the RTX 5000 Ada Generation's ray tracing cores (10 versus 100), which is notable for an integrated part.

The specification sheet shows that the Arc Pro B370 is designed for a completely different workload class. It has no dedicated memory, no tensor cores, and no standalone power delivery. Its FP16 performance of 12.29 TFLOPS is higher than its FP32 performance, indicating a 2:1 ratio that suits mixed-precision tasks, but the absolute numbers remain far below the NVIDIA part. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation's 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio means it does not sacrifice precision for throughput.

In practical terms, the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is the only one of the two with verified performance results, and those results place it among the fastest workstation GPUs in the database. The Arc Pro B370 is a functional integrated processor with modest specifications, but the absence of benchmark data means its real-world performance cannot be quantified. The database records zero wins for either part in head-to-head tests, which reflects the lack of direct comparison rather than any measured outcome. The data supports a clear split: the NVIDIA card is for high-throughput compute and rendering, while the Intel part is for low-power, integrated graphics in portable or compact systems.