Intel Arc Pro B50 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU delivers 130.0 TFLOPS FP32 and 260.0 TFLOPS FP16, while the Intel Arc Pro B50 provides 10.65 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.30 TFLOPS FP16. The Rubin GPU outperforms by approximately 12.2x in FP32 and 12.2x in FP16.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and higher bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU features 288 GB of HBM4 memory with a 16384-bit bus and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B50 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Rubin GPU holds a 98.9% advantage in bandwidth.

Q: What are the physical power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B50 has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, requiring no power connectors and fitting in a dual-slot form factor. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W and a suggested PSU of 2700 W, packaged as an SXM Module.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The Intel Arc Pro B50 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU lists "N/A" for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its server-oriented design with no display outputs.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU achieves 54.41 GPixel/s compared to the Intel Arc Pro B50's 41.60 GPixel/s, a 30.8% advantage. However, the Intel part has a higher boost clock at 2600 MHz versus 2267 MHz for the Rubin GPU.

Q: How do the transistor counts and die sizes compare?

A: The NVIDIA Rubin GPU contains 336,000 million transistors on a 1456 mm² die, while the Intel Arc Pro B50 has 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die. The Rubin GPU uses a 3 nm process versus 5 nm for the Intel part, resulting in a transistor density of 230.8M / mm² versus 72.1M / mm².

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B50 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, codenamed Battlemage, and represents the Pro Series generation. It uses the BMG-G21 chip fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. The die measures 272 mm² and contains 19,600 million transistors, yielding a density of 72.1M / mm². The architecture includes 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, and 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. The chip operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. Memory is handled through a 128-bit GDDR6 interface with 16 GB capacity, running at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU employs the Rubin architecture, belonging to the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation. It uses the GR100 chip, also fabricated by TSMC but on a more advanced 3 nm process. The die is substantially larger at 1456 mm² and integrates 336,000 million transistors, achieving a density of 230.8M / mm². This part features 28,672 shading units, 896 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 896 tensor cores. Notably, the Rubin GPU does not list dedicated ray tracing cores in the recorded data. Its clock speeds are lower in base at 700 MHz but reach a boost of 2267 MHz. Memory consists of 288 GB of HBM4 across a massive 16384-bit bus, operating at 2695 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective speed.

The interface and connectivity differ fundamentally. The Intel Arc Pro B50 uses PCIe 5.0 x8 and provides four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses PCIe 6.0 x16 and has no display outputs, reflecting its server-focused nature. The Intel part supports a full graphics API stack including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Rubin GPU reports no API support in these categories. Power delivery also diverges: the Intel card draws 70 W with no external connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Rubin GPU requires 2300 W and a 2700 W suggested PSU, mounted as an SXM Module.

The Verdict

The recorded data positions these two GPUs in entirely different market segments. The Intel Arc Pro B50 is a client-side graphics card with display outputs, a conventional dual-slot form factor, and full graphics API support. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server compute module with no display outputs and no graphics API support listed, prioritizing massive compute throughput and memory capacity.

Benchmark results place the Intel Arc Pro B50 at the 17th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2660. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (2662, -0.1% delta), NVIDIA Quadro K1100M (2664, -0.2% delta), NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 (2645, +0.6% delta), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER (2690, -1.1% delta). These deltas indicate the Intel part performs within 1.1% of these competitors on average.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no recorded benchmarks and no nearest rivals in the database. Its percentile rank is listed at 50, but this is based on no actual benchmark data, making direct performance comparisons impossible from the available facts. The Rubin GPU's specifications indicate server-class compute capability, not client graphics performance.

For users requiring a graphics card with display outputs, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and modest power requirements, the Intel Arc Pro B50 is the only viable option between the two. For server workloads demanding massive FP32 and FP16 throughput, 288 GB of memory, and extremely high bandwidth, the NVIDIA Rubin GPU is designed for that purpose. The data does not support recommending one over the other for the same use case, as they target mutually exclusive application domains.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Pro B50 | NVIDIA Rubin GPU |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Xe2-HPG | Rubin |

| Generation | Battlemage (Pro Series) | Server Rubin (Rxx) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 19,600 million | 336,000 million |

| Die Size | 272 mm² | 1456 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 72.1M / mm² | 230.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1700 MHz | 700 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2600 MHz | 2267 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz 14 Gbps effective | 2695 MHz 10.8 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 288 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM4 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 16384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 22.1 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 28672 |

| TMUs | 128 | 896 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 16 | Not listed |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 896 |

| Pixel Rate | 41.60 GPixel/s | 54.41 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 332.8 GTexel/s | 2,031.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.65 TFLOPS | 130.0 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 21.30 TFLOPS (2:1) | 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 70 W | 2300 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 2700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x8 | PCIe 6.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | No outputs |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2025-09-04 | 2025-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 349 USD | Not listed |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark data exists in the database for these two GPUs. The Intel Arc Pro B50 has eight recorded benchmark scores, while the NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no benchmarks listed. The winsA and winsB counters both show zero, confirming no direct competition data is available.

For the Intel Arc Pro B50, the individual benchmark scores are as follows: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 1604, PassMark DirectX 10 at 58, PassMark DirectX 11 at 100, PassMark DirectX 12 at 64, PassMark DirectX 9 at 144, PassMark G2D at 717, PassMark G3D at 12553, and PassMark GPU Compute at 6037. The average benchmark score for this part is 2660.

The performance distribution shows the Intel card scoring highest in PassMark G3D (12553), which reflects general 3D graphics performance. The compute-focused PassMark GPU Compute score of 6037 is less than half of the G3D score. DirectX-specific tests show variance: DirectX 11 scores highest at 100, followed by DirectX 9 at 144, DirectX 12 at 64, and DirectX 10 at 58. The G2D score of 717 indicates modest 2D performance relative to the 3D capabilities.

The nearest rival data places the Intel Arc Pro B50 in a tight performance cluster. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 averages 2662, within 0.1% of the Intel part. The NVIDIA Quadro K1100M averages 2664, within 0.2%. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 averages 2645, which is 0.6% lower than the Intel card. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER averages 2690, exceeding the Intel part by 1.1%. These deltas indicate that the Intel Arc Pro B50 performs essentially on par with entry-level NVIDIA GPUs from previous generations, despite its newer architecture.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU's percentile of 50 with no benchmark data should not be interpreted as a performance measurement. Without recorded scores, the database cannot establish its competitive position relative to any other GPU. Its specifications suggest extreme compute capability, but the absence of benchmark data prevents quantitative comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B50 wins in scenarios requiring client graphics functionality. It provides four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, enabling direct display connection, which the NVIDIA Rubin GPU cannot do with its "No outputs" specification. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for graphics applications that rely on these APIs. Its power profile is dramatically lower at 70 W TDP with no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, allowing installation in systems without high-capacity power supplies. The dual-slot form factor and dimensions of 167 mm length, 69 mm height, and 40 mm width permit standard chassis mounting. Its launch MSRP of 349 USD was recorded at release.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU wins in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 130.0 TFLOPS exceeds the Intel part's 10.65 TFLOPS by more than twelvefold. FP16 performance follows the same ratio, with 260.0 TFLOPS versus 21.30 TFLOPS. The 288 GB HBM4 memory capacity dwarfs the 16 GB GDDR6 on the Intel card, and the 22.1 TB/s bandwidth is nearly one hundred times higher than 224.0 GB/s. The 896 tensor cores provide dedicated AI compute resources that the Intel part does not list. Texture rate reaches 2,031.2 GTexel/s versus 332.8 GTexel/s, a sixfold advantage. The Rubin GPU also has a higher pixel rate at 54.41 GPixel/s versus 41.60 GPixel/s.

The server-oriented design of the Rubin GPU is evident in its PCIe 6.0 x16 interface and SXM Module form factor, which suit dense compute environments. The lack of display outputs and graphics API support confirms its role as a compute accelerator rather than a graphics card. The Intel Arc Pro B50, by contrast, is positioned for workstation graphics with its comprehensive API support and display connectivity.

For workloads involving graphics rendering, display output, or DirectX/Vulkan/OpenGL applications, the Intel Arc Pro B50 is the functional choice. For workloads involving massive parallel computation, large memory footprints, or tensor operations, the NVIDIA Rubin GPU provides the necessary resources. The data shows no overlap in their intended use cases, and no benchmark data exists to suggest either would perform competitively in the other's domain.