Intel Arc Pro B65 vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the primary architectural generation for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture from the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation, while the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is built on the Blackwell Ultra architecture from the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation.

Q: How do the two chips compare in transistor count and die size?

A: The Intel chip packs 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip contains 208,000 million transistors on a much larger 1628 mm² die. This gives the NVIDIA part a higher transistor density of 127.8M per mm² versus 72.1M per mm² for Intel.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 608.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, providing 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a wider bus interface?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses PCIe 6.0 x16, while the Intel Arc Pro B65 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA card also has no display outputs, whereas the Intel card offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1.

Q: What is the peak FP32 compute for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC achieves 76.99 TFLOPS. Notably, the NVIDIA card also sustains 76.99 TFLOPS for FP16, indicating a 1:1 ratio, while Intel's FP16 is 24.58 TFLOPS at a 2:1 rate.

Q: How does the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: The recorded Geekbench OpenCL score for the B300 SXM6 AC is 369,831. This places it 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 10.4% ahead of the NVIDIA H200 NVL (334,891), 16.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994), and 25% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Arc Pro B65 uses the Xe2-HPG architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with the BMG-G21 chip. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC, also on a 5 nm TSMC process, uses the GB110 chip with the Blackwell Ultra architecture. Both are fabricated at TSMC, but the scale of the NVIDIA chip is dramatically larger.

The transistor counts tell a clear story. Intel's die holds 19,600 million transistors, while NVIDIA's GB110 packs 208,000 million, over ten times as many. The die size difference is equally stark: 272 mm² for Intel versus 1628 mm² for NVIDIA. The transistor density per square millimeter is 72.1M for Intel and 127.8M for NVIDIA, indicating the NVIDIA design uses its silicon more efficiently despite the larger physical footprint.

Shading unit counts also diverge sharply. The Intel GPU has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 80 render output units (ROPs). The NVIDIA GPU has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, and only 24 ROPs. This unusual ROP count for NVIDIA reflects its server-oriented design, where pixel throughput is less critical than compute and tensor workloads. Intel includes 20 ray tracing cores, while NVIDIA specifies 592 tensor cores and does not list dedicated RT cores in the data.

Clock speeds present another contrast. The Intel chip runs at a fixed 2400 MHz for both base and boost. The NVIDIA chip has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. The memory clocks also differ: Intel's GDDR6 runs at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective), while NVIDIA's HBM3e runs at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The much wider 8192-bit bus on the NVIDIA card is what enables its enormous bandwidth advantage.

Power and physical format are distinct as well. The Intel Arc Pro B65 is a dual-slot card with a 200 W TDP and a single 8-pin power connector, requiring a 550 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is an SXM module with a 1100 W TDP and a 1500 W suggested PSU. The Intel card supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 6.0 x16. Display output capabilities differ completely: the Intel card has 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while the NVIDIA module has no display outputs, reinforcing its compute-only role.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data available for these two products shows a clear split in intended use cases. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a recorded OpenCL benchmark score of 369,831 and sits at the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. This places it in a class of its own for raw compute throughput. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has no recorded benchmarks in the database, and its percentile ranking is 50, indicating it sits at the median of all GPUs. That gap in measured performance aligns with the architectural differences: NVIDIA's 76.99 TFLOPS of FP32 is roughly 6.3 times Intel's 12.29 TFLOPS.

For workloads that rely on memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA card is in a different league. Its 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, enabled by HBM3e and an 8192-bit bus, is over 13 times the 608.0 GB/s available on the Intel card. Applications that stream large datasets, such as AI training or scientific simulations, would show massive advantages for the NVIDIA part. The Intel card's GDDR6 memory and 256-bit bus are more typical of a workstation or professional visualization product, which is consistent with its DisplayPort outputs and dual-slot form factor.

The Intel card does have advantages in specific areas. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is nearly four times NVIDIA's 48.77 GPixel/s. This is a direct consequence of the ROP count difference: 80 ROPs on Intel versus 24 ROPs on NVIDIA. For rasterization-heavy tasks, such as rendering to display or certain graphics pipelines, the Intel card's architecture is better suited. The texture rate also favors Intel on a per-clock basis: 384.0 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA's 1,202.9 GTexel/s, though the raw NVIDIA number is higher.

The Intel card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA card lists N/A for all three APIs. This confirms that the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is not designed for traditional graphics workloads, while the Intel Arc Pro B65 is a fully featured graphics adapter. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is listed as Server Hopper and its successor as Server Rubin, indicating a roadmap focused on data center compute rather than client graphics.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The chip names are BMG-G21 for Intel and GB110 for NVIDIA. The process node is the same, 5 nm at TSMC, but the implementation diverges completely.

Transistor count: 19,600 million versus 208,000 million. Die size: 272 mm² versus 1628 mm². Transistor density: 72.1M per mm² versus 127.8M per mm².

Clocks: Intel base and boost are both 2400 MHz; NVIDIA base is 1665 MHz and boost is 2032 MHz. Memory clock: Intel at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) versus NVIDIA at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective).

Memory size: 32 GB versus 288 GB. Memory type: GDDR6 versus HBM3e. Bus width: 256 bit versus 8192 bit. Bandwidth: 608.0 GB/s versus 8.19 TB/s.

Shading units: 2560 versus 18944. TMUs: 160 versus 592. ROPs: 80 versus 24. Ray tracing cores: 20 for Intel, none listed for NVIDIA. Tensor cores: none listed for Intel, 592 for NVIDIA.

Pixel rate: 192.0 GPixel/s versus 48.77 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 1,202.9 GTexel/s. FP32: 12.29 TFLOPS versus 76.99 TFLOPS. FP16: 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 76.99 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP: 200 W versus 1100 W. Slot width: dual-slot versus SXM module. Power connectors: 1x 8-pin for Intel, none listed for NVIDIA. Suggested PSU: 550 W versus 1500 W. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for Intel, none for NVIDIA.

API support: Intel lists DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; NVIDIA lists N/A for all three. Release dates differ as well: Intel is dated 2026-03-31, while NVIDIA is dated 2025-09-10. Both are marked as active in production.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single recorded benchmark for the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC: a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has no benchmark scores recorded, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. This means direct comparison relies on the NVIDIA card's performance relative to its nearest rivals, plus the architectural specifications of both cards.

The NVIDIA score of 369,831 places it at the 100th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA B200, scores 345,482, which is 7% lower. The H200 NVL scores 334,891, 10.4% lower. The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994, 16.3% lower. The NVIDIA L40S scores 295,763, 25% lower. These deltas show that the B300 SXM6 AC is the fastest GPU in the database by a meaningful margin, with the closest competitor trailing by 7 percentage points.

The FP32 compute figures reinforce this. At 76.99 TFLOPS, the B300 SXM6 AC has 6.3 times the FP32 throughput of the Arc Pro B65's 12.29 TFLOPS. The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided: NVIDIA sustains 76.99 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio, while Intel achieves 24.58 TFLOPS at 2:1. This means NVIDIA's FP16 performance is roughly 3.1 times higher than Intel's, and it does not rely on a reduced precision mode to get there.

Memory bandwidth is another area of decisive NVIDIA advantage. The 8.19 TB/s on the B300 SXM6 AC is 13.5 times the 608.0 GB/s on the Arc Pro B65. In workloads that are memory-bound, this delta would translate directly into runtime improvements. The 288 GB capacity on the NVIDIA card is also 9 times the 32 GB on the Intel card, allowing much larger datasets to reside on the GPU without host memory transfers.

The Intel card does claim wins in pixel throughput. At 192.0 GPixel/s, it is 3.9 times faster than NVIDIA's 48.77 GPixel/s. This is notable because the B300 SXM6 AC has no display outputs and lists no graphics API support, suggesting that rasterization is not a priority for that part. The Intel card's texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is lower than NVIDIA's 1,202.9 GTexel/s in absolute terms, but the Intel card achieves this with far fewer TMUs: 160 versus 592. The per-TMU throughput is actually higher on the Intel design, at 2.4 GTexel/s per TMU versus 2.03 for NVIDIA.

The transistor density figures also warrant attention. NVIDIA packs 127.8M transistors per mm², compared to 72.1M for Intel. This higher density, combined with the larger die, explains the massive compute advantage. The Intel card's lower density may reflect a design optimized for power efficiency, given its 200 W TDP versus 1100 W for the NVIDIA module.

The Verdict

The data positions these two GPUs in entirely different segments. The Intel Arc Pro B65 is a workstation graphics card with display outputs, a dual-slot form factor, and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its 32 GB of GDDR6 memory and 200 W TDP make it suitable for professional visualization and graphics-focused workloads. The pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, driven by 80 ROPs, indicates strong rasterization capability for its class.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is a server accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and an 1100 W TDP. Its 288 GB of HBM3e memory, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, and 76.99 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 compute place it at the 100th percentile in the database. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831 is 7% ahead of the closest rival, the NVIDIA B200, and 25% ahead of the L40S. This is the fastest GPU in the recorded data by a substantial margin.

Users who need a graphics card with display connectivity and standard API support should select the Intel Arc Pro B65. It offers a complete feature set for rendering and visualization, with a modest 200 W power draw and a single 8-pin connector. Users who need maximum compute throughput for server or data center workloads should select the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC, which delivers 6.3 times the FP32 performance and 13.5 times the memory bandwidth of the Intel card. The NVIDIA part also offers 592 tensor cores, which the Intel card lacks entirely, making it the only choice for tensor-based workloads in this comparison.