Intel Arc Pro B65 vs NVIDIA H800 SXM5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Arc Pro B65 and the NVIDIA H800 SXM5. Both parts hold an identical 50th percentile position among all GPUs in the database, and neither has an average benchmark score recorded. The absence of measured performance data means any direct performance ranking cannot be established from the available information.

The raw compute specifications, however, show a substantial gap in peak throughput. The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 delivers 59.30 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is roughly 4.8 times the 12.29 TFLOPS offered by the Intel Arc Pro B65. In FP16 workloads, the gap widens further: the H800 SXM5 reaches 237.2 TFLOPS using a 4:1 ratio, while the Arc Pro B65 achieves 24.58 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. That puts the H800 SXM5 at approximately 9.7 times the FP16 throughput of the Arc Pro B65.

Memory bandwidth tells a similar story. The H800 SXM5 accesses 3.36 TB/s of bandwidth across its 5120-bit HBM3 interface, compared to 608.0 GB/s on the Arc Pro B65's 256-bit GDDR6 bus. The H800 SXM5 therefore provides roughly 5.5 times the memory bandwidth. The H800 SXM5 also carries 80 GB of memory versus 32 GB on the Arc Pro B65, a 2.5 times capacity advantage.

Texture and pixel throughput favor the NVIDIA part in raw rates. The H800 SXM5 records 926.6 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s on the Arc Pro B65, a 2.4 times difference. Pixel rate inverts the trend: the Arc Pro B65 posts 192.0 GPixel/s, while the H800 SXM5 manages only 42.12 GPixel/s. That 4.6 times advantage for the Intel part reflects the H800 SXM5's small ROP count of 24 compared to 80 on the Arc Pro B65.

The H800 SXM5 also leads in shading units and texture mapping units. It carries 16,896 shading units and 528 TMUs, versus 2,560 shading units and 160 TMUs on the Arc Pro B65. The Intel part counters with 20 ray tracing cores, a feature the H800 SXM5 does not list at all. Tensor core counts differ as well: the H800 SXM5 includes 528 tensor cores, while the Arc Pro B65 lists none.

Clock behavior separates the two designs. The Arc Pro B65 runs at a fixed 2400 MHz for both base and boost, while the H800 SXM5 spans from 1095 MHz base to 1755 MHz boost. The Intel part's higher clock speed partially compensates for its smaller shader count, but the sheer scale of the NVIDIA GPU's execution resources overwhelms that clock advantage in peak FP32 and FP16 throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 wins decisively in compute-heavy and memory-bound workloads. Its 59.30 TFLOPS FP32 and 237.2 TFLOPS FP16 figures position it for large-scale scientific computing, AI training, and inference tasks that rely on dense matrix math. The 528 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for tensor operations, a capability entirely absent from the Arc Pro B65's specification sheet. The 3.36 TB/s memory bandwidth and 80 GB HBM3 capacity further support massive datasets that would exhaust the Arc Pro B65's 32 GB GDDR6 pool quickly.

The Intel Arc Pro B65 wins in graphics-oriented workloads that depend on pixel throughput and ray tracing. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, driven by 80 ROPs, exceeds the H800 SXM5's 42.12 GPixel/s by a wide margin. The 20 ray tracing cores give the Arc Pro B65 hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering, a feature the H800 SXM5 does not expose in its specifications. The Arc Pro B65 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 APIs, while the H800 SXM5 lists no graphics API support at all. The Arc Pro B65 includes 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, whereas the H800 SXM5 provides no display outputs, confirming the Intel part's role as a graphics-capable workstation adapter and the NVIDIA part's role as a compute accelerator.

Texture throughput favors the H800 SXM5 at 926.6 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, so in texture-heavy rendering scenarios, the NVIDIA part still holds an advantage despite its lower pixel rate. The Arc Pro B65's higher clock speed of 2400 MHz versus the H800 SXM5's 1755 MHz boost helps close some gaps in latency-sensitive workloads, but the recorded data does not include measured latency or real-world application results.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses the BMG-G21 chip built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 uses the GH100 chip built on the Hopper architecture, belonging to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. Both chips are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, but their physical characteristics diverge sharply. The GH100 die measures 814 mm² and contains 80,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 98.3M per mm². The BMG-G21 die measures 272 mm² with 19,600 million transistors, for a density of 72.1M per mm². The NVIDIA chip uses roughly 4.1 times the transistor count across a die about 3 times larger.

The memory subsystems reflect different design philosophies. The H800 SXM5 uses HBM3 memory on a 5120-bit bus, which enables the 3.36 TB/s bandwidth figure. The Arc Pro B65 uses GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, limiting bandwidth to 608.0 GB/s but allowing a conventional add-in card form factor. The H800 SXM5's memory clock runs at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective data rate, while the Arc Pro B65's memory runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective. The wider bus on the NVIDIA part overwhelms the Intel part's faster per-pin data rate.

Shader organization differs as well. The H800 SXM5 packs 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, plus 528 tensor cores and no listed ray tracing cores. The Arc Pro B65 contains 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with 20 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA architecture prioritizes massive parallel compute and tensor throughput, while the Intel architecture balances rasterization, pixel output, and ray tracing for graphics workloads.

Power delivery and physical form factor also distinguish the two. The H800 SXM5 draws up to 700 W and uses an SXM Module form factor with 8-pin EPS power connectors. The Arc Pro B65 consumes 200 W in a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin connector. The NVIDIA part suggests an 1100 W power supply, while the Intel part recommends 550 W. The H800 SXM5's predecessor is listed as Server Ada and its successor as Server Blackwell, while the Arc Pro B65 has no listed predecessor or successor.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The H800 SXM5 uses the GH100 chip, the Arc Pro B65 uses BMG-G21. The H800 SXM5 belongs to the Hopper architecture and Server Hopper generation; the Arc Pro B65 belongs to Xe2-HPG and Battlemage (Pro Series). Both use 5 nm TSMC fabrication, but the H800 SXM5 packs 80,000 million transistors versus 19,600 million, and its die size is 814 mm² versus 272 mm².

Clock speeds diverge: the Arc Pro B65 runs at 2400 MHz base and boost, while the H800 SXM5 runs at 1095 MHz base and 1755 MHz boost. Memory configurations differ completely: 80 GB HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus with 3.36 TB/s bandwidth for the H800 SXM5, versus 32 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 608.0 GB/s for the Arc Pro B65. Memory clock rates also differ, with the H800 SXM5 at 1313 MHz (5.3 Gbps effective) and the Arc Pro B65 at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective).

Compute resources show the H800 SXM5 ahead in shading units (16,896 vs 2,560), TMUs (528 vs 160), and tensor cores (528 vs none). The Arc Pro B65 leads in ROPs (80 vs 24) and includes 20 ray tracing cores versus none listed for the H800 SXM5. Pixel rate favors the Arc Pro B65 at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 42.12 GPixel/s, while texture rate favors the H800 SXM5 at 926.6 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 throughput both favor the H800 SXM5: 59.30 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS in FP32, and 237.2 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS in FP16.

Power and cooling requirements separate the pair further. The H800 SXM5 lists a 700 W TDP, SXM Module slot width, 8-pin EPS power connectors, and an 1100 W suggested PSU. The Arc Pro B65 lists a 200 W TDP, dual-slot width, 1x 8-pin connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU. Display output differs completely: the Arc Pro B65 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while the H800 SXM5 provides no outputs. API support likewise differs: the Arc Pro B65 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the H800 SXM5 lists none. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for both. Release dates differ, with the H800 SXM5 appearing on 2023-03-20 and the Arc Pro B65 on 2026-03-31. Both parts are marked Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 delivers 59.30 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to 12.29 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc Pro B65, a difference of roughly 4.8 times in favor of the NVIDIA part.

Q: How much memory does each GPU provide, and what type?

A: The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 offers 80 GB of HBM3 memory on a 5120-bit bus with 3.36 TB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B65 offers 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 608.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B65 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc Pro B65 includes 20 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 does not list any ray tracing cores in its specifications.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP and suggests an 1100 W power supply. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has a 200 W TDP and suggests a 550 W power supply.

Q: Which GPU provides display outputs?

A: Only the Intel Arc Pro B65 provides display outputs, with 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 lists no display outputs.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 includes 528 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Pro B65 lists no tensor cores in its specifications.