Intel Arc Pro B60 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000M Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data reveals a stark contrast between these two professional graphics solutions, though direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons are limited by the fact that each product was tested under different benchmark suites. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M, an end-of-life mobile workstation part from 2011, has only a single Geekbench OpenCL result of 3,434 points. The Intel Arc Pro B60, a 2025 desktop professional GPU, offers a broader benchmark profile but its average score across all tests is 3,182 — notably lower than the Quadro's single OpenCL score.

Looking at the percentile rankings, both cards sit in the bottom quarter of all GPUs, with the Quadro 2000M at the 21st percentile and the Arc Pro B60 at the 20th percentile. This near-identical percentile placement masks enormous architectural differences. The Quadro's 3,434 Geekbench OpenCL score places it 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (3,431), 1.3% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3,389), and 3.1% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3,332). However, it trails the GeForce 920MX by 2.7% (3,528).

The Arc Pro B60's average benchmark score of 3,182 sees it 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (3,163) and 3.5% ahead of the GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER (3,075), while sitting 0.9% behind the GeForce GT 640 (3,210) and 3.2% behind the GeForce 920M (3,287). These deltaPct values are surprisingly small given the generational gap, suggesting that the average score metric flattens meaningful performance differences across varied workloads.

Where the Arc Pro B60 demonstrates its capabilities is in its dedicated benchmark suite. Its PassMark G3D score of 14,580 dwarfs its DirectX 10 score of 61, DirectX 11 score of 122, DirectX 12 score of 76, and DirectX 9 score of 179. The GPU compute score of 7,029 and G2D score of 763 round out the profile. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2,646 reflects modern rendering workloads. These numbers indicate that the Arc Pro B60 is optimized for specific modern API workloads rather than legacy DirectX paths, a pattern consistent with its Xe2-HPG architecture.

# Architecture Differences

The fundamental gap between these two GPUs is generational and architectural. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M uses the GF106 chip built on Fermi architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 4.9 million per square millimeter. The Intel Arc Pro B60 employs the BMG-G21 chip on Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage Pro Series), fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. Its 19,600 million transistors occupy a 272 mm² die, achieving a density of 72.1 million per square millimeter — roughly 14.7 times denser than the Fermi part.

The memory subsystems reflect the generational leap. The Quadro 2000M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s bandwidth at 900 MHz (1,800 Mbps effective). The Arc Pro B60 features 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 456.0 GB/s at 2,375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). That is a 15.8-fold increase in memory bandwidth and a 12-fold increase in capacity.

Compute resources differ dramatically. The Quadro 2000M has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, producing 4.400 GPixel/s pixel rate and 17.60 GTexel/s texture rate. Its FP32 throughput is 422.4 GFLOPS. The Arc Pro B60 scales to 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 384.0 GTexel/s texture rate. Its FP32 performance reaches 12.29 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The Arc also includes 20 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Fermi architecture.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The Quadro 2000M draws 55 W TDP on an MXM module with no power connectors and a portable-device-dependent display output. The Arc Pro B60 consumes 200 W TDP in a dual-slot form factor measuring 167 mm by 69 mm by 40 mm, requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. The bus interface also differs: MXM-A (3.0) for the Quadro versus PCIe 5.0 x8 for the Arc, with the latter providing four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

API support reveals another divide. The Quadro 2000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan listing. The Arc Pro B60 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro's release date of 2011-01-12 and end-of-life status contrast with the Arc's 2025-09-04 release and active production status.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M has a higher single benchmark score of 3,434 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel Arc Pro B60's average across all its benchmarks is 3,182. However, the Arc's average includes multiple DirectX and PassMark tests, while the Quadro's score comes from one test only.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 contains 19,600 million transistors, which is roughly 16.8 times the 1,170 million transistors in the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M. The Arc also achieves a much higher density at 72.1M transistors per mm² versus 4.9M per mm² for the Quadro.

Q: What memory configurations do these cards use?

A: The Quadro 2000M offers 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Pro B60 provides 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Arc Pro B60 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc Pro B60 includes 20 ray tracing cores as part of its Xe2-HPG architecture. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M, built on Fermi, has no ray tracing hardware.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro 2000M has a 55 W TDP and uses an MXM module with no power connectors. The Arc Pro B60 has a 200 W TDP, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and recommends a 550 W power supply.

Q: Which card has better DirectX 12 support?

A: The Arc Pro B60 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro 2000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The Arc's implementation is more modern and feature-complete.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 2000M | Intel Arc Pro B60 |

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

| Chip | GF106 | BMG-G21 |

| Architecture | Fermi | Xe2-HPG |

| Generation | Quadro Fermi-M (x000M) | Battlemage (Pro Series) |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | 19,600 million |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | 272 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 4.9M / mm² | 72.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | — | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | — | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) | 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 456.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 32 | 160 |

| ROPs | 16 | 80 |

| RT Cores | — | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.400 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.60 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 422.4 GFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | — | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 200 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | — | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | — | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | — | 167 mm x 69 mm x 40 mm |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2011-01-12 | 2025-09-04 |

| Launch MSRP | — | 499 USD |

# Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M wins in the narrow context of its specific benchmark. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 3,434 exceeds the Arc Pro B60's average score of 3,182, and its percentile ranking of 21st is one point higher than the Arc's 20th. For legacy professional workloads that rely on OpenCL performance and operate within the constraints of a 55 W mobile form factor, the Quadro 2000M's single-test advantage is meaningful. Its MXM module design and portable-device-dependent display outputs make it suitable for older mobile workstations where power efficiency and compactness are priorities. The Quadro also carries the advantage of being a mature, end-of-life product with a known ecosystem.

The Intel Arc Pro B60 wins across nearly every other measurable dimension. Its 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 performance represents a 29.1-fold increase over the Quadro's 422.4 GFLOPS. Memory bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s is 15.8 times higher, and its 24 GB capacity is 12 times larger. The inclusion of 20 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support positions it for modern rendering pipelines that the Fermi architecture cannot handle. Its PassMark G3D score of 14,580 and GPU compute score of 7,029 demonstrate substantial capability in contemporary graphics workloads, while the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,646 indicates readiness for current-generation gaming and professional visualization tasks.

The Arc Pro B60 also wins on connectivity and expandability. Its PCIe 5.0 x8 interface, four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, and dual-slot form factor with active cooling support sustained professional use. The 5 nm process technology and 72.1M transistors per mm² density represent a manufacturing generation that the 40 nm Fermi part cannot approach. For users needing ray tracing, Vulkan 1.4, or large memory pools for AI or simulation workloads, the Arc Pro B60 is the clear choice. The Quadro 2000M retains relevance only for legacy compatibility and specific low-power mobile deployments, while the Arc Pro B60 is designed for active professional work in 2025 and beyond.