Intel Arc Pro B370 vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Arc Pro B370 based on?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process node within the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation.

Q: What GPU does the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation use?

A: It uses the AD103 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process node. It has 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.1M per mm².

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all being system dependent. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the clock speeds of the two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation has a base clock of 930 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz or 18 Gbps effective.

Q: What is the power consumption of each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation has a TDP of 120 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows two GPUs with very different design targets. The Intel Arc Pro B370 is a 25 W integrated graphics processor with 1280 shading units and a 50th percentile standing among all GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation is a 120 W discrete-class embedded GPU with 9728 shading units, also at the 50th percentile. The recorded specifications indicate that the NVIDIA part delivers substantially higher raw throughput across every measured unit: FP32, FP16, pixel rate, and texture rate. The Intel part uses system shared memory and depends on the host system for bandwidth, while the NVIDIA part has dedicated 16 GB GDDR6 with 576.0 GB/s. For workloads that rely on sustained compute throughput, the data points to the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation as the stronger performer. For low-power integrated scenarios where the host memory is acceptable, the Arc Pro B370 fits a different niche entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark array in the database contains no recorded entries, so the comparison must rest on the specification-level throughput figures and architectural differences. The FP32 compute figures show the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation at 32.69 TFLOPS, which is roughly five times the 6.144 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Pro B370. In FP16, the NVIDIA part delivers 32.69 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 12.29 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The texture rate tells a similar story: the NVIDIA GPU provides 510.7 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s for the Intel GPU. The pixel rate is 188.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 48.00 GPixel/s for Intel.

The shading unit count reinforces this separation. NVIDIA's 9728 shading units compare with Intel's 1280. TMUs stand at 304 versus 40, and ROPs at 112 versus 20. RT cores number 76 on the NVIDIA part and 10 on the Intel part. Tensor cores exist only on the NVIDIA part, with 304 of them; the Intel database entry lists no tensor core count. The memory subsystem is another decisive factor. The NVIDIA GPU has dedicated 16 GB GDDR6 with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit bus. The Intel GPU relies on system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. That means the Intel part's memory throughput cannot be stated as a fixed number, as it varies with the host platform.

Clock behavior differs by design. The Intel part has a higher boost clock at 2400 MHz compared with 1680 MHz for NVIDIA, but the NVIDIA part has a much higher base clock at 930 MHz versus 300 MHz. The boost advantage for Intel does not compensate for the massive difference in execution resources. The pixel rate and texture rate deltas are consistent with the shading unit and ROP counts, not with clock speed alone. The data indicates that in every fixed throughput metric, the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation leads by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, while the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture. Process nodes differ: Intel uses 3 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm. The foundry is Intel for the Arc part and TSMC for the NVIDIA part. Transistor count is listed as unknown for Intel, while NVIDIA lists 45,900 million transistors. Die size is unknown for Intel, while NVIDIA lists 379 mm². Transistor density is not listed for Intel, while NVIDIA lists 121.1M per mm².

The Intel GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 RT cores, with no tensor core count listed. The NVIDIA GPU has 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 76 RT cores, and 304 tensor cores. Clock speeds differ substantially: Intel's base clock is 300 MHz with a 2400 MHz boost, while NVIDIA's base clock is 930 MHz with a 1680 MHz boost. Memory configuration is fundamentally different: Intel uses system shared memory for size, type, bus width, and bandwidth, while NVIDIA has 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Power consumption differs: 25 W for Intel versus 120 W for NVIDIA. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors. The bus interface is IGP for Intel and PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The performance figures follow the resource counts: Intel lists 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate, 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 at 2:1. NVIDIA lists 188.2 GPixel/s, 510.7 GTexel/s, 32.69 TFLOPS FP32, and 32.69 TFLOPS FP16 at 1:1.

Release dates also differ. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a release date of 2026-01-26, while the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation was released on 2023-03-20. The NVIDIA part is listed as a successor to Ampere-MW and has a successor in Blackwell-MW, while the Intel part lists HD Graphics-WM as its predecessor and no successor. Both are marked as Active in production status. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap between these two GPUs is significant. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses Xe3-LPG, built on Intel's 3 nm process. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation uses Ada Lovelace, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. The NVIDIA chip integrates 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, while the Intel chip's transistor count and die size are unknown in the database. The process node advantage for Intel in nanometers does not translate into a compute advantage in the recorded data.

The compute architecture differs in execution resource counts. Intel provides 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and 10 RT cores. NVIDIA provides 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, and 76 RT cores. The NVIDIA part also includes 304 tensor cores, while the Intel entry lists no tensor core count. The FP16 execution ratio differs: Intel runs at 2:1 relative to FP32, while NVIDIA runs at 1:1. That means the NVIDIA part sustains full FP16 throughput equal to its FP32 figure, 32.69 TFLOPS, while Intel's FP16 figure of 12.29 TFLOPS is double its FP32 rate of 6.144 TFLOPS.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Intel GPU integrates with system shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity are dictated by the host platform, not by the GPU itself. The NVIDIA GPU uses dedicated 16 GB GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and fixed 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. This is a structural difference, not just a capacity difference. The NVIDIA part's bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Intel part uses IGP. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, which suggests both target portable or embedded devices, but the NVIDIA part still requires 120 W while the Intel part requires only 25 W.

The API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The database shows no difference in API feature level. The difference lies entirely in the hardware resources behind those APIs. The generation names reflect the different lineages: Intel is in the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation, while NVIDIA is in the Ada-MW generation, with Ampere-MW as predecessor and Blackwell-MW as successor.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in power efficiency and integration simplicity. Its 25 W TDP is a fraction of the 120 W TDP of the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation. For systems with strict thermal or power budgets, the Intel part is the lighter load. Its boost clock of 2400 MHz is higher than NVIDIA's 1680 MHz boost, which indicates that when the workload is light and the execution units are not saturated, the Intel part can run at a higher frequency. The use of system shared memory means the GPU has no dedicated memory pool to manage, which can simplify the memory layout in a unified memory architecture. The 3 nm process node gives Intel a manufacturing process advantage in feature size, even though the database does not record the transistor count or die size for the Intel chip.

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation wins in every fixed compute throughput metric. Its FP32 figure of 32.69 TFLOPS is more than five times the Intel part's 6.144 TFLOPS. Its FP16 figure of 32.69 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio exceeds Intel's 12.29 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. The pixel rate of 188.2 GPixel/s is nearly four times Intel's 48.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate of 510.7 GTexel/s is more than five times Intel's 96.00 GTexel/s. The 16 GB GDDR6 memory with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth is a fixed resource, whereas the Intel part's memory bandwidth is system dependent and therefore variable. The 304 tensor cores provide dedicated tensor processing capability that the Intel part does not list. The 76 RT cores give the NVIDIA part a much higher ray tracing resource count than the 10 RT cores on the Intel part.

In terms of shading resources, the NVIDIA part has 9728 shading units versus 1280, 304 TMUs versus 40, and 112 ROPs versus 20. These ratios align with the throughput deltas. For applications that scale with shading units, texture units, or ROPs, the NVIDIA part has a decisive advantage. For applications that are bound by power draw or that operate in a unified memory system, the Intel part has the structural advantage. The release date also differs, with the Intel part releasing later at 2026-01-26 versus 2023-03-20 for NVIDIA, but the database shows no benchmark results for either part, so the performance ranking rests entirely on the recorded specification figures.