Intel Arc Pro B65 vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Intel Arc Pro B65 and NVIDIA N1 20SM occupy the same percentile ranking in the database, but they are fundamentally different products. The Arc Pro B65 is a 200 W dual-slot discrete GPU built for rendering and compute workloads, while the N1 20SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a massive 128 GB unified memory pool. The data indicates that the Arc Pro B65 is the choice for traditional graphics pipelines, whereas the N1 20SM is positioned for memory-capacity-driven tasks. Benchmark scores for both are recorded as zero, so the analysis relies on architectural and specification differences.

The Verdict

The Intel Arc Pro B65 is the clear pick for users who need a dedicated graphics card with full API support. It carries DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which makes it suitable for gaming, content creation, and professional visualization. The N1 20SM, by contrast, reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, meaning it does not expose standard graphics APIs. Any workload requiring those APIs must use the Arc Pro B65.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins outright on memory capacity. It offers 128 GB of LPDDR5X, which is four times the 32 GB GDDR6 found on the Arc Pro B65. For large dataset processing, AI inference, or in-memory databases, the N1 20SM provides a capacity advantage that no specification on the Intel side can match. The trade-off is bandwidth: the Arc Pro B65 delivers 608.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s for the N1, so the Intel part moves data more than twice as fast per second.

The verdict splits cleanly. Pick the Arc Pro B65 for rasterization, ray tracing, and any software stack that expects a discrete GPU with standard drivers. Pick the N1 20SM for memory-bound compute where capacity outweighs raw throughput. The N1 20SM has tensor cores (80), which the Arc Pro B65 lacks entirely, but without API support for standard graphics, its role is confined to specialized compute.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different manufacturers and architectures. Intel uses the BMG-G21 chip based on Xe2-HPG, part of the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. NVIDIA uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel die is 272 mm² with 19,600 million transistors, giving a density of 72.1M per mm². The NVIDIA die is larger at 382 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown, so density cannot be computed.

Both parts have 2560 shading units and 160 texture mapping units (TMUs). The Arc Pro B65 has 80 raster output units (ROPs), while the N1 20SM has only 24 ROPs. This explains the massive difference in pixel rate: 192.0 GPixel/s for Intel versus 56.30 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Ray tracing cores are equal at 20 per chip. The N1 20SM adds 80 tensor cores; the Arc Pro B65 has none listed.

The N1 20SM is an IGP, meaning it is integrated into a system-on-chip design with no separate slot width or power connectors. The Arc Pro B65 is a dual-slot card requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. Clock behavior also differs sharply. The Arc Pro B65 runs at a flat 2400 MHz base and boost. The N1 20SM has a 741 MHz base clock that boosts to 2346 MHz, a 1605 MHz range that suggests aggressive power management.

Memory architecture diverges. The Arc Pro B65 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus at 19 Gbps effective. The N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on the same 256 bit bus but at 8.5 Gbps effective. The Intel memory clock is 2375 MHz, the NVIDIA is 1067 MHz. The resulting bandwidth figures are 608.0 GB/s and 273.2 GB/s respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two products. Both have an average benchmark score of zero and no nearest rivals recorded. However, the specification data enables direct comparisons across several measured fields.

The Arc Pro B65 leads decisively in pixel throughput. Its 192.0 GPixel/s is 3.4 times the N1 20SM's 56.30 GPixel/s. This is a direct consequence of the ROP count: 80 versus 24. For any fill-rate-limited workload, such as high-resolution rendering or multi-sample anti-aliasing, the Intel part has a structural advantage.

Texture rate is nearly identical. The Arc Pro B65 achieves 384.0 GTexel/s, and the N1 20SM achieves 375.4 GTexel/s. The difference is 8.6 GTexel/s, or 2.3% in favor of Intel. With equal TMU counts (160 each), this small delta comes from the clock speed difference: Intel's flat 2400 MHz versus NVIDIA's 2346 MHz boost.

Compute throughput is close. The Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32, and the N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP32. Intel leads by 0.28 TFLOPS, about 2.3%. In FP16, the gap reverses depending on ratio. The Arc Pro B65 lists 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it uses shader cores for FP16. The N1 20SM lists 12.01 TFLOPS FP16 at 1:1, so it has no FP16 acceleration beyond FP32 rates. If a workload relies on FP16, the Intel part is roughly twice as fast in raw shader throughput.

Memory bandwidth favors Intel by a wide margin. At 608.0 GB/s, the Arc Pro B65 moves data at 2.2 times the N1 20SM's 273.2 GB/s. This affects any memory-streaming workload, including texture-heavy rendering and large matrix operations. The N1 20SM counters with memory capacity: 128 GB versus 32 GB. The N1 20SM holds four times more data on-chip, which matters for models or datasets that exceed 32 GB.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Pro B65 | NVIDIA N1 20SM |

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

| Chip | BMG-G21 | GB20B |

| Architecture | Xe2-HPG | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Generation | Battlemage (Pro Series) | Blackwell IGP (N1x) |

| Transistors | 19,600 million | Unknown |

| Die Size | 272 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 72.1M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 2400 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2400 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2375 MHz | 1067 MHz |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 608.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| ROPs | 80 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 192.0 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 384.0 GTexel/s | 375.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 12.29 TFLOPS | 12.01 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) | 12.01 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | Unknown |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

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

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | null |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x HDMI |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

The table shows that shading units, TMUs, RT cores, and bus interface are identical. The differences are concentrated in memory configuration, ROP count, tensor cores, physical form factor, and API support.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X, which is four times the 32 GB GDDR6 on the Intel Arc Pro B65.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 has 608.0 GB/s, which is more than double the N1 20SM's 273.2 GB/s.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No. The Intel Arc Pro B65 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 20SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: How do the FP32 compute performances compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32, and the NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP32. Intel is 0.28 TFLOPS ahead, a margin of about 2.3%.

Q: Which GPU has more tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM has 80 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Pro B65 has no tensor cores listed.

Q: What are the physical form factor differences?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 is a dual-slot card with a 200 W TDP, a single 8-pin power connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and an unknown TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B65 wins in every scenario that depends on rasterization throughput. Its 80 ROPs produce a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, which is 3.4 times the N1 20SM's 56.30 GPixel/s. For 3D rendering, viewport compositing, or any workload that writes many pixels per frame, the Arc Pro B65 is the superior part. Its 608.0 GB/s bandwidth also ensures that texture streaming and large framebuffer operations do not stall.

The Arc Pro B65 further wins on API compatibility. With DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, it can run standard graphics applications. The N1 20SM reports N/A for all three, so it cannot participate in conventional graphics stacks. The Intel part also has a higher texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s) and a higher FP32 rate (12.29 TFLOPS versus 12.01 TFLOPS), giving it small but consistent leads in compute.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins exclusively on memory capacity and tensor core availability. Its 128 GB unified pool is unmatched by the Arc Pro B65's 32 GB. For inference tasks where model weights and activations must reside in memory, the N1 20SM can hold four times the data. The 80 tensor cores provide dedicated matrix math acceleration, something the Arc Pro B65 lacks entirely.

The N1 20SM also wins on physical integration. As an IGP, it requires no expansion slot, no power connector, and no PSU upgrade. The Arc Pro B65 needs a dual-slot space, an 8-pin connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU. For systems where discrete graphics is impossible, the N1 20SM is the only option.

The N1 20SM has a larger die at 382 mm² versus 272 mm², but its transistor count is unknown, so efficiency comparisons are not possible. Its lower memory bandwidth (273.2 GB/s) and lower pixel rate (56.30 GPixel/s) are direct disadvantages. The N1 20SM is a capacity-first design. The Arc Pro B65 is a throughput-first design. The data shows no overlap in their optimal use cases.