AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM vs Intel Arc Pro B50 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data does not include any direct head-to-head benchmark runs between the AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM and the Intel Arc Pro B50. The database shows zero wins for each side in direct comparisons, and no individual test scores are available for the AMD part. The Intel Arc Pro B50, however, has a full set of measured results. Its PassMark G3D score of 12,553 and GPU compute score of 6,037 place it in the 17th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM sits at the 50th percentile, though this percentile is based on aggregate positioning rather than a direct score in the same test suite.

The Intel Arc Pro B50's average benchmark score of 2,660 places it in a tight cluster. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030, averages 2,662, a delta of -0.1%, meaning the Arc Pro B50 trails by a negligible margin. The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M averages 2,664, a delta of -0.2%, again a nearly identical result. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 averages 2,645, putting the Arc Pro B50 ahead by 0.6%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER averages 2,690, and the Arc Pro B50 sits 1.1% behind that part. These deltas show the Arc Pro B50 operating in a performance band where four very different NVIDIA offerings land within roughly a two percent spread.

The AMD card's arithmetic, based on the specification data, indicates substantially higher raw throughput in several fixed-function areas. Its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s compares to 41.60 GPixel/s for the Intel part, a difference of 28.80 GPixel/s. The AMD texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s is lower than the Intel figure of 332.8 GTexel/s, a gap of 209.6 GTexel/s in favor of Intel. FP32 compute shows the Intel part ahead at 10.65 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS for AMD. FP16 performance differs sharply: the AMD card sustains 7.885 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel card reaches 21.30 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it processes FP16 at twice the rate of FP32.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 has 2,048 shading units, while the AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM has 1,792. Intel also leads in texture mapping units, 128 to 112, but AMD has more render output units, 64 versus 16.

Q: How does memory capacity compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 carries 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, double the 8 GB on the AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM. Both use a 128-bit memory bus, but the Intel card achieves 224.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 172.8 GB/s for the AMD card.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 has a TDP of 70 W and requires no external power connectors. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM has a TDP of 55 W and uses one 6-pin power connector. Both list a 250 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which card is newer?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 was released on September 4, 2025. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM was released earlier, on August 7, 2025. The Intel part is listed with an active production status, while the AMD part has no production status recorded.

Q: How do their ray tracing resources compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM includes 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc Pro B50 includes 16 ray tracing cores. Neither card has tensor cores recorded in the database.

Q: What display outputs are available?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM provides one HDMI 2.1a port and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The Intel Arc Pro B50 provides four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish, and belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B50 uses the BMG-G21 chip built on Xe2-HPG architecture and belongs to the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but on different nodes: the AMD chip uses a 6 nm process, while the Intel chip uses a 5 nm process.

Transistor counts differ meaningfully. The AMD chip contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Intel chip contains 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, with a density of 72.1M per mm². The Intel die is larger by 68 mm² and packs 6,300 million more transistors.

Clock behavior also diverges. The AMD card runs a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, with memory at 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). The Intel card runs a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The Intel core clocks are substantially higher, which contributes to its FP32 and texture rate advantages despite having fewer render output units.

The interface and physical design differ. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel card uses PCIe 5.0 x8. The AMD card is single-slot with a 1x 6-pin power connector; the Intel card is dual-slot with no power connectors. Both cards measure 167 mm in length (6.6 inches). The Intel card adds height of 69 mm (2.7 inches) and width of 40 mm (1.6 inches), while those dimensions are not recorded for the AMD card. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data describes two cards with different strengths. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM holds a percentile ranking of 50, which is well above the Intel Arc Pro B50's 17th percentile. That gap suggests the AMD part performs better across the full GPU population in the database, even though no direct benchmark scores are recorded for it. The AMD card also has a higher pixel rate, 70.40 GPixel/s versus 41.60 GPixel/s, and more render output units, 64 versus 16, which typically benefits fill-rate-bound workloads.

The Intel Arc Pro B50 counters with a higher FP32 compute figure, 10.65 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS, and a much higher FP16 figure, 21.30 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 332.8 GTexel/s is nearly three times the AMD card's 123.2 GTexel/s. It also has double the memory capacity, 16 GB versus 8 GB, and higher bandwidth, 224.0 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s.

The average benchmark scores place the Intel part at 2,660, with nearest rivals all within a narrow band. The closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030, is only 0.1% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER is 1.1% ahead. The AMD card's 50th percentile position indicates it lands above that cluster in the overall distribution, but the absence of a direct score means the margin cannot be quantified from the recorded data.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across every major specification category. Process node: 6 nm for AMD, 5 nm for Intel. Transistors: 13,300 million for AMD, 19,600 million for Intel. Die size: 204 mm² for AMD, 272 mm² for Intel. Transistor density: 65.2M per mm² for AMD, 72.1M per mm² for Intel. Base clock: 330 MHz for AMD, 1700 MHz for Intel. Boost clock: 1100 MHz for AMD, 2600 MHz for Intel. Memory clock: 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for AMD, 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for Intel.

Memory size: 8 GB for AMD, 16 GB for Intel. Memory type is GDDR6 for both, and bus width is 128 bit for both. Bandwidth: 172.8 GB/s for AMD, 224.0 GB/s for Intel. Shading units: 1,792 for AMD, 2,048 for Intel. TMUs: 112 for AMD, 128 for Intel. ROPs: 64 for AMD, 16 for Intel. Ray tracing cores: 28 for AMD, 16 for Intel. Pixel rate: 70.40 GPixel/s for AMD, 41.60 GPixel/s for Intel. Texture rate: 123.2 GTexel/s for AMD, 332.8 GTexel/s for Intel. FP32: 7.885 TFLOPS for AMD, 10.65 TFLOPS for Intel. FP16: 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD, 21.30 TFLOPS (2:1) for Intel.

TDP: 55 W for AMD, 70 W for Intel. Slot width: single-slot for AMD, dual-slot for Intel. Power connectors: 1x 6-pin for AMD, none for Intel. Suggested PSU: 250 W for both. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD, PCIe 5.0 x8 for Intel. Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD, 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for Intel. Length is identical at 167 mm (6.6 inches); height and width are recorded only for Intel at 69 mm (2.7 inches) and 40 mm (1.6 inches). Release dates: August 7, 2025 for AMD, September 4, 2025 for Intel. The Intel card has a recorded launch MSRP of 349 USD. The AMD card has no launch MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM wins in scenarios that depend on pixel throughput. Its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s is 69% higher than the Intel card's 41.60 GPixel/s, and its 64 ROPs outnumber the Intel card's 16 by a factor of four. This points to an advantage in traditional rasterization workloads where final pixel output is the bottleneck. The AMD card also has more ray tracing cores, 28 versus 16, which may help in ray-traced scenes, though no direct ray tracing benchmark is recorded.

The Intel Arc Pro B50 wins in compute-heavy and texture-heavy workloads. Its FP32 output of 10.65 TFLOPS is 35% higher than the AMD card's 7.885 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 21.30 TFLOPS is 2.7 times the AMD figure. Its texture rate of 332.8 GTexel/s is 2.7 times the AMD rate. These figures suggest the Intel card is better suited to workloads that stress shader math and texture sampling. The 16 GB memory capacity and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth also give it a clear advantage for large datasets and higher-resolution texture sets.

The percentile data adds context. The AMD card's 50th percentile ranking across all GPUs is well above the Intel card's 17th percentile, indicating the AMD part sits higher in the overall performance distribution. The Intel card's measured average score of 2,660 places it in a cluster with older NVIDIA parts like the GT 1030 and GT 440, with deltas of -0.1% and +0.6% respectively. The AMD card's lack of a recorded benchmark score leaves its exact position unmeasurable, but the percentile field places it at the median of the database, a substantially stronger overall standing than the Intel part.