Intel Arc Pro B390 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the fundamental architectural differences between the Intel Arc Pro B390 and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture on Intel's 3 nm process, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server uses the GB203 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process. The NVIDIA part is built on a 45,600 million transistor design with a 378 mm² die size, whereas the Intel part's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare between these two GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 800.3 GB/s of bandwidth with a memory clock of 1563 MHz (25 Gbps effective).

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server delivers 50.70 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 50.70 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (1:1 ratio). The Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio). This gives NVIDIA a 6.6x advantage in FP32 throughput.

Q: What are the thermal and power specifications for each card?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 has an 80 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and a slot width of IGP. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server has a 165 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin power connector, requires a 450 W suggested PSU, and occupies a single-slot form factor.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both the Intel Arc Pro B390 and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means they share identical API compatibility levels.

Q: What is the production status and release timeline for these products?

A: Both products are listed as Active in production. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has a release date of January 26, 2026, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server has a release date of March 16, 2026. The Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-WM, and the NVIDIA part's predecessor is Server Hopper with a successor of Server Rubin.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B390 and NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server represent fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's offering is an integrated graphics processor built on the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. This is a power-efficient design with an 80 W TDP, designed to be part of a larger processor package rather than a standalone discrete solution.

NVIDIA's RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server, in contrast, is a dedicated server-class discrete GPU built on the GB203 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture. Fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, it contains 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 120.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part does not disclose its transistor count or die size, making direct density comparisons impossible.

The compute resources differ dramatically. Intel's Xe3-LPG architecture implements 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster operation pipelines, and 12 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA's Blackwell 2.0 implementation features 10,496 shading units, 328 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 82 ray tracing cores, and 328 tensor cores. The Intel part does not list tensor cores, while NVIDIA's 328 tensor cores represent a substantial AI compute resource.

Clock behavior also diverges. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, a wide dynamic range that suggests aggressive power management. NVIDIA's part runs at 1215 MHz base and 2415 MHz boost, a narrower range with a higher floor. Memory architecture is entirely different: Intel uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, while NVIDIA employs dedicated 32 GB GDDR7 on a 256-bit interface with 800.3 GB/s bandwidth.

The physical form factors reflect their intended deployment. Intel's part is an IGP with no power connectors and no slot width beyond the integrated package. NVIDIA's part is a single-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, requiring a 16-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. NVIDIA's card has no display outputs, indicating a compute-only server role, while Intel's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The Verdict

The data indicates two products serving entirely different market segments. The Intel Arc Pro B390 is an integrated solution for mobile or compact platforms where power efficiency and space constraints dominate. Its 80 W TDP, IGP form factor, and system shared memory position it as a capable integrated graphics solution for general computing with modest graphics acceleration needs.

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server is a dedicated server accelerator. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, 800.3 GB/s bandwidth, 50.70 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and 328 tensor cores place it in a different performance class entirely. The absence of display outputs confirms its role as a compute-focused accelerator for data center workloads, AI inference, and rendering tasks.

For users requiring maximum compute throughput, the NVIDIA part is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications. The FP32 performance difference is substantial: 50.70 TFLOPS versus 7.680 TFLOPS. The memory bandwidth advantage is equally pronounced: 800.3 GB/s versus system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part also brings 82 ray tracing cores versus 12 on the Intel part, and 328 tensor cores versus none listed.

For users prioritizing power efficiency and integration, the Intel part has advantages. The 80 W TDP versus 165 W TDP represents a 2.06x power draw difference. The IGP form factor requires no additional power connectors and no discrete card slot. The 3 nm process node suggests advanced manufacturing efficiency, and the wide clock range from 300 MHz to 2500 MHz indicates flexible power scaling.

The production status for both is Active, and both were released in early 2026, with Intel arriving in January and NVIDIA in March. The NVIDIA part's successor, Server Rubin, is already listed, suggesting an established product roadmap, while Intel's part has no successor listed.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. Process node: Intel uses 3 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm. Foundry: Intel uses its own fabrication, NVIDIA uses TSMC. Transistor count: Intel is unknown, NVIDIA is 45,600 million. Die size: Intel is unknown, NVIDIA is 378 mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly. Intel's base clock is 300 MHz versus NVIDIA's 1215 MHz. Intel's boost clock is 2500 MHz versus NVIDIA's 2415 MHz. Memory clock for Intel is system shared, while NVIDIA operates at 1563 MHz with 25 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. Intel has system shared memory of system shared type on a system shared bus width with system dependent bandwidth. NVIDIA has 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus with 800.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources show NVIDIA's dominance. Shading units: 1,536 versus 10,496. TMUs: 48 versus 328. ROPs: 24 versus 112. Ray tracing cores: 12 versus 82. Tensor cores: none listed for Intel, 328 for NVIDIA.

Performance rates follow the same pattern. Pixel rate: 60.00 GPixel/s versus 270.5 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 120.0 GTexel/s versus 792.1 GTexel/s. FP32: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 50.70 TFLOPS. FP16: 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 50.70 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specifications diverge. TDP: 80 W versus 165 W. Slot width: IGP versus single-slot. Power connectors: none versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU: not listed versus 450 W. Bus interface: IGP versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs: portable device dependent versus no outputs.

Dimensions only exist for NVIDIA: 267 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width. Intel's dimensions are all null. Release dates differ by about two months, and the predecessor/successor chains are entirely separate.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either GPU. Both products have zero average benchmark scores and zero entries in their benchmark arrays. The head-to-head benchmark array is also empty, and both parts show zero wins in the winsA and winsB fields. However, the specification data provides a basis for comparing theoretical performance ceilings.

The most significant compute advantage for NVIDIA appears in FP32 throughput. The RTX PRO 4500 delivers 50.70 TFLOPS, which is 6.6 times the 7.680 TFLOPS of the Arc Pro B390. This gap suggests that any FP32-heavy workload, such as scientific computing or simulation, would see a substantial performance differential favoring NVIDIA.

Memory bandwidth presents another decisive gap. NVIDIA's 800.3 GB/s of dedicated GDDR7 bandwidth versus Intel's system dependent shared memory means memory-bound workloads will scale dramatically in NVIDIA's favor. The 32 GB dedicated capacity also allows for larger datasets to reside locally, avoiding system memory bottlenecks.

Texture and pixel throughput favor NVIDIA as well. NVIDIA's 792.1 GTexel/s texture rate is 6.6 times Intel's 120.0 GTexel/s. NVIDIA's 270.5 GPixel/s pixel rate is 4.5 times Intel's 60.00 GPixel/s. These rates indicate NVIDIA's advantage in fill-rate-limited scenarios such as high-resolution rendering.

Ray tracing resources show NVIDIA with 82 RT cores versus Intel's 12, a 6.8x difference. NVIDIA's 328 tensor cores, absent from Intel's specification, provide dedicated AI acceleration that Intel cannot match with listed specifications.

The FP16 comparison is interesting. NVIDIA maintains a 1:1 ratio at 50.70 TFLOPS, while Intel achieves 15.36 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. This means NVIDIA's FP16 performance is 3.3 times Intel's, and NVIDIA does not sacrifice FP16 throughput relative to FP32.

Clock behavior offers Intel some advantages. Intel's 2500 MHz boost clock exceeds NVIDIA's 2415 MHz boost. Intel's 300 MHz base clock versus NVIDIA's 1215 MHz base suggests Intel can idle at much lower power levels, though this is not directly measurable from the data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins in power efficiency and integration scenarios. Its 80 W TDP is less than half of NVIDIA's 165 W TDP. The IGP form factor eliminates the need for a discrete card slot, external power connectors, or additional chassis space. The 3 nm process node indicates advanced manufacturing efficiency, and the wide clock range from 300 MHz base to 2500 MHz boost allows for aggressive power scaling during idle and light load conditions.

The Intel part also wins in portability scenarios. Its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, suggesting deployment in mobile platforms. The system shared memory architecture reduces component count and system complexity, making it suitable for compact designs where dedicated VRAM adds cost and power overhead.

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server wins in every compute-intensive category. The 50.70 TFLOPS FP32 throughput supports demanding numerical workloads. The 50.70 TFLOPS FP16 performance with 1:1 ratio serves mixed-precision AI training and inference. The 328 tensor cores provide dedicated matrix math acceleration that the Intel part cannot match.

NVIDIA also wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. The 32 GB GDDR7 configuration with 800.3 GB/s bandwidth enables large model loading and high-throughput data processing. The 256-bit memory bus provides balanced access for compute workloads. The dedicated memory architecture eliminates contention with system memory traffic.

For ray tracing workloads, NVIDIA's 82 RT cores versus Intel's 12 provides a 6.8x resource advantage. The 328 TMUs and 112 ROPs support high-resolution texture and pixel processing. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides high-bandwidth host communication, while Intel's IGP bus interface relies on the integrated processor's memory controller.

The NVIDIA part's server positioning is reinforced by its lack of display outputs, indicating compute-only deployment. Its single-slot form factor allows dense server configurations, and the 450 W suggested PSU requirement fits standard server power delivery. The 165 W TDP, while higher than Intel's, is modest for a server accelerator with this compute density.