Intel Arc Pro B390 vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc Pro B390 or the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero and an empty benchmark list, meaning no synthetic or real-world test results have been recorded for these accelerators. The percentile placement for both is identical at 50, indicating the midpoint of all GPUs in the database, though this is a default value rather than a computed ranking from actual workloads.

Without recorded performance data, the head-to-head comparison must rely on the theoretical peak specifications listed in the database. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 9.0 times the 7.680 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Pro B390. In FP16 workloads, the gap narrows slightly: the B200 sustains 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 15.36 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, meaning the NVIDIA accelerator still holds a 4.5x advantage. Texture throughput tells a similar story, with the B200 posting 1,083.4 GTexel/s against 120.0 GTexel/s for the Arc Pro, a 9.0x margin.

Pixel fill rate is the single metric where the Intel part wins outright. The Arc Pro B390 achieves 60.00 GPixel/s, while the B200 SXM6 manages 43.92 GPixel/s, a 36.6% advantage for the Intel product. This is notable because both parts have exactly 24 ROPs, yet the Intel device's higher boost clock of 2500 MHz compared to 1830 MHz on the B200 drives the pixel rate difference. The B200 compensates with a far larger shading array: 18,944 shaders versus 1,536, and 592 TMUs versus 48, which explains the massive texture rate disparity.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive split. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e across a 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has system-shared memory with bandwidth labeled as system dependent, meaning its effective throughput is tied to the host platform and cannot be directly quantified from the database. On paper, the B200 offers an enormous bandwidth advantage, but the Intel part's shared-memory design makes its real-world performance contingent on the CPU and system configuration.

Clock behavior also differs fundamentally. The Arc Pro B390 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost of 2500 MHz, while the B200 SXM6 runs at a low 120 MHz base with a 1830 MHz boost. The Intel part's higher clocks help its ROP-bound pixel throughput, but the NVIDIA accelerator's massive shader count and memory subsystem dominate in compute-heavy scenarios. Neither product has recorded game clocks, and the B200 has no display outputs, confirming its server-oriented role.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B390 is positioned for integrated graphics in portable or compact systems. Its IGP slot width, lack of power connectors, and system-shared memory indicate a design that uses host RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. The pixel rate advantage of 60.00 GPixel/s suggests strength in 2D rendering, basic display output, and light graphical tasks where ROP throughput matters more than raw compute. The 12 RT cores provide ray tracing capability within a 80 W power envelope, making it suitable for thin-and-light devices with modest graphical demands. Its API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, allowing compatibility with modern graphics software.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a data-center accelerator built for extreme compute workloads. Its 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance, combined with 592 tensor cores, targets AI training, inference, and scientific simulation. The 180 GB HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth supports massive model sizes and high-throughput data movement. The 1000 W TDP and suggested PSU of 1400 W indicate a rack-mounted SXM module designed for servers with dedicated power delivery. It has no display outputs and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, confirming it is not intended for client-side graphics. Its PCIe 6.0 x16 interface allows high-speed host communication, and its 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die represent a flagship-class silicon investment.

Use-case separation is clear. The Intel part wins in integrated, low-power, display-oriented scenarios. The NVIDIA part wins in every compute metric, memory capacity, and bandwidth category. The pixel rate victory for Intel is the only recorded metric where it leads, and that advantage is unlikely to matter in the B200's intended server environment.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS, which is 9.0 times the 7.680 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Pro B390.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B390 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 12 RT cores. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 lists no RT core count in the database.

Q: What memory configuration does each product use?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e on a 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which product has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 achieves 60.00 GPixel/s, compared to 43.92 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA B200 SXM6, a 36.6% advantage.

Q: What is the power requirement for the NVIDIA B200 SXM6?

A: Its TDP is 1000 W, and the database lists a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The Intel part has an 80 W TDP and no power connectors.

Q: Are these products comparable for the same use case?

A: No. The Intel Arc Pro B390 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with display outputs dependent on the portable device, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server module with no display outputs and no consumer graphics API support.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

• Chip and architecture: Intel uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, while NVIDIA uses the GB100 chip with Blackwell architecture.
• Process node and foundry: Intel is built on a 3 nm process at Intel, NVIDIA on a 5 nm process at TSMC.
• Transistors and die size: NVIDIA has 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die with a density of 127.8M per mm². Intel's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.
• Clocks: Intel has a 300 MHz base and 2500 MHz boost; NVIDIA has a 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost.
• Memory: Intel uses system-shared memory; NVIDIA has 180 GB of HBM3e.
• Memory bus and bandwidth: Intel is system-shared; NVIDIA is 8192 bit with 8.19 TB/s.
• Shading units: Intel has 1,536; NVIDIA has 18,944.
• Texture mapping units: Intel has 48; NVIDIA has 592.
• Render output units: Both have 24.
• RT cores: Intel has 12; NVIDIA lists none.
• Tensor cores: Intel lists none; NVIDIA has 592.
• Pixel rate: Intel has 60.00 GPixel/s; NVIDIA has 43.92 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: Intel has 120.0 GTexel/s; NVIDIA has 1,083.4 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Intel has 7.680 TFLOPS; NVIDIA has 69.34 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Intel has 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1); NVIDIA has 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: Intel is 80 W; NVIDIA is 1000 W.
• Slot width: Intel is IGP; NVIDIA is SXM Module.
• Power connectors: Intel has none; NVIDIA lists none.
• Suggested PSU: Intel has none; NVIDIA is 1400 W.
• Bus interface: Intel is IGP; NVIDIA is PCIe 6.0 x16.
• Display outputs: Intel is portable device dependent; NVIDIA has no outputs.
• APIs: Intel supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; NVIDIA supports none of these.
• Release date: Intel released on 2026-01-26; NVIDIA on 2024-10-31.
• Predecessor: Intel's is HD Graphics-WM; NVIDIA's is Server Hopper.
• Successor: Intel has none; NVIDIA's is Server Rubin.
• Launch MSRP: Intel has none; NVIDIA is 34,999 USD.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B390 belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation and uses the Xe3-LPG architecture. This is a low-power integrated graphics design on a 3 nm process, built by Intel. The architecture emphasizes efficiency within an 80 W envelope, pairing 1,536 shaders with 48 TMUs and 24 ROPs. The 12 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing, and the 2:1 FP16 ratio indicates shared execution units rather than dedicated FP16 pipelines. The system-shared memory design means the GPU accesses the host's RAM, with bandwidth dependent on the platform's memory subsystem. Its API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 makes it compatible with consumer and professional graphics stacks. The production status is active, and its predecessor is HD Graphics-WM.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is part of the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation and uses the Blackwell architecture on a 5 nm process at TSMC. This is a massive server accelerator with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, the largest silicon footprint in the database. The architecture prioritizes raw compute and memory bandwidth, with 18,944 shaders, 592 TMUs, and 592 tensor cores. The FP16 performance matches FP32 at a 1:1 ratio, indicating dedicated tensor and FP16 hardware optimized for AI workloads. The 180 GB HBM3e memory with 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth is designed to feed large-scale parallel computations. The absence of RT cores and display outputs, along with no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, confirms a compute-only design. The 1000 W TDP and 1400 W suggested PSU reflect a power-hungry module for server chassis. Its predecessor is Server Hopper, and its successor is Server Rubin.

The architectural split is stark: Intel's Xe3-LPG is a compact, low-power integrated design with graphics APIs and ray tracing, while NVIDIA's Blackwell is a monolithic compute accelerator with tensor cores, HBM3e, and no display path. The 3 nm versus 5 nm process difference gives Intel an efficiency advantage per transistor, but NVIDIA compensates with sheer scale. The Intel part's 2500 MHz boost clock is higher than the B200's 1830 MHz, yet the NVIDIA chip's 12.3x shader count and 12.3x TMU count overwhelm clock speed in most workloads. The 24 ROPs on both parts are identical, but the Intel part's higher clock yields a better pixel rate. The B200's PCIe 6.0 x16 interface provides a modern host connection, while the Intel IGP communicates over the internal fabric. Release timing also differs, with Intel launching in January 2026 versus NVIDIA in October 2024.