Intel Arc Pro B65 vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two accelerators cleanly by design philosophy. Intel Arc Pro B65 is built as a discrete professional graphics card, while NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a radically different memory strategy.

The Arc Pro B65 wins in pixel throughput. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is more than double the N1X 40SM's 93.84 GPixel/s. This comes from 80 ROPs versus 40 ROPs and a 2400 MHz boost clock, which is only 54 MHz higher than the NVIDIA part's 2346 MHz boost, but the ROP advantage is decisive. For rasterization-heavy workloads, the Intel part delivers over twice the fill rate.

The N1X 40SM wins in shading and texture throughput. Its FP32 compute of 24.02 TFLOPS is nearly double the Arc Pro B65's 12.29 TFLOPS. Its 5120 shading units versus 2560, and 320 TMUs versus 160, translate to a texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s against 384.0 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part is the clear leader for shader-bound and texture-heavy tasks.

The N1X 40SM also wins on memory capacity. It carries 128 GB of LPDDR5X, while the Arc Pro B65 has 32 GB of GDDR6. However, capacity is not bandwidth. The Intel card's 608.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than double the N1X's 273.2 GB/s. The Arc Pro B65 uses a 256-bit bus with 19 Gbps effective GDDR6, while the N1X uses a 256-bit bus with 8.5 Gbps effective LPDDR5X. The Intel part is better for bandwidth-hungry operations; the NVIDIA part is better for fitting very large datasets entirely in local memory.

In ray tracing, the N1X 40SM has 40 RT cores versus 20 on the Arc Pro B65. The NVIDIA part also has 160 tensor cores, while the Arc Pro B65 lists no tensor core count. For AI-accelerated workloads, the data points entirely to the N1X.

The Arc Pro B65 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM lists N/A for all three APIs. For any conventional graphics API workload, the Intel part is the only option with recorded support.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS, which is 95.5% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B65's 12.29 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 provides 608.0 GB/s, more than double the NVIDIA N1X 40SM's 273.2 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has more memory capacity?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X, four times the 32 GB of GDDR6 on the Intel Arc Pro B65.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: Which GPU has more RT cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 40 RT cores, exactly double the 20 RT cores on the Intel Arc Pro B65.

Q: What is the physical form factor difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B65 is a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows zero recorded benchmark wins for either part, but the specification sheets tell a clear comparative story.

The largest single advantage belongs to the NVIDIA N1X 40SM in texture throughput. At 750.7 GTexel/s, it is 95.5% ahead of the Arc Pro B65's 384.0 GTexel/s. This is driven by 320 TMUs versus 160, a direct doubling of texture units. The FP32 gap is identical in percentage terms: 24.02 TFLOPS versus 12.29 TFLOPS is also a 95.5% lead. Both figures point to the N1X being nearly twice as capable in shader and texture work.

The N1X also leads in shading unit count with 5120 versus 2560, and in RT cores with 40 versus 20. Its tensor core count of 160 versus none on the Intel part is the largest qualitative gap in the entire comparison.

The Intel Arc Pro B65 counters in pixel rate. At 192.0 GPixel/s, it leads by 104.6% over the N1X's 93.84 GPixel/s. The ROP count of 80 versus 40 explains this. The Intel part also leads memory bandwidth by 122.5%: 608.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage is notable despite the NVIDIA part having four times the capacity.

Clock speeds are close. The Arc Pro B65 runs at 2400 MHz base and boost, while the N1X runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. The Intel part has a much higher sustained base clock, but the boost clocks are within 54 MHz of each other.

The memory type difference is fundamental. GDDR6 at 19 Gbps effective on the Intel part versus LPDDR5X at 8.5 Gbps effective on the NVIDIA part. Both use a 256-bit bus, so the bandwidth gap comes entirely from memory speed.

Specification Differences

Memory capacity: 32 GB GDDR6 on the Intel Arc Pro B65 versus 128 GB LPDDR5X on the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. That is a 96 GB difference.

Memory speed: 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) on the Intel part versus 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) on the NVIDIA part.

Bandwidth: 608.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s, a 334.8 GB/s gap.

Shading units: 2560 versus 5120, a 2560-unit gap.

TMUs: 160 versus 320, a 160-unit gap.

ROPs: 80 versus 40, a 40-unit gap.

RT cores: 20 versus 40, a 20-core gap.

Tensor cores: none listed on Intel, 160 on NVIDIA.

FP32: 12.29 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS.

FP16: 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) on Intel versus 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1) on NVIDIA. The Intel part has a 0.56 TFLOPS lead in FP16, but it is achieved via a 2:1 ratio rather than native 1:1 compute.

Pixel rate: 192.0 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s.

Power: 200 W TDP, dual-slot, 1x 8-pin, 550 W suggested PSU on Intel. The NVIDIA part has unknown TDP, is an IGP, has no power connectors, and no suggested PSU.

Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 on Intel versus 1x HDMI on NVIDIA.

APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 on Intel versus N/A for all on NVIDIA.

Die size: 272 mm² on Intel versus 382 mm² on NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part is 110 mm² larger.

Transistors: 19,600 million on Intel versus unknown on NVIDIA.

Transistor density: 72.1M / mm² on Intel versus null on NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B65 uses the BMG-G21 chip with Xe2-HPG architecture from the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture from the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation, also on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Both parts share the same foundry and process node, but the transistor counts differ. Intel reports 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, giving a density of 72.1M / mm². NVIDIA reports unknown transistor count on a 382 mm² die, which is 40.4% larger in area.

The Xe2-HPG architecture on Intel is designed for discrete graphics with a full API stack. The Blackwell 2.0 architecture on NVIDIA is an integrated graphics processor. This architectural split explains the API gap: the Intel part lists full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, while NVIDIA lists N/A for all three.

The NVIDIA part integrates 160 tensor cores, which are absent from the Intel specification. This indicates a design aimed at AI and compute acceleration rather than conventional graphics rendering. The Intel part has no tensor core count, suggesting its compute focus is on traditional graphics pipelines.

The memory architectures differ fundamentally. Intel uses GDDR6 discrete memory with high bandwidth. NVIDIA uses LPDDR5X, which is typical for integrated designs where memory is shared with the host system. The 128 GB capacity on the NVIDIA part is characteristic of an IGP addressing a unified memory pool.

The power delivery reflects the form factor difference. Intel's 200 W TDP requires a dual-slot cooler and an 8-pin connector. NVIDIA's IGP has no power connector, consistent with an integrated solution drawing power from the motherboard.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct audiences. The Intel Arc Pro B65 is the choice for conventional graphics workloads. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which the NVIDIA part does not. It doubles the pixel rate at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s, and it more than doubles memory bandwidth at 608.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. For any application that renders to a display through standard graphics APIs, the Arc Pro B65 is the only viable option among these two, and it brings the ROP count and bandwidth to back that position.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the choice for compute-heavy and AI-accelerated tasks. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 is 95.5% ahead of the Intel part. Its 750.7 GTexel/s texture rate is equally dominant. The 160 tensor cores provide an acceleration path that the Intel part lacks entirely. The 128 GB memory capacity allows datasets to reside locally that would never fit in 32 GB. The 40 RT cores double the Intel count for ray tracing work.

The FP16 comparison is the only close metric. Intel lists 24.58 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio, which is 2.3% above NVIDIA's 24.02 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA implementation is native, while the Intel number relies on a packed ratio, so the practical FP16 throughput is likely similar.

The die size difference favors NVIDIA in raw complexity. At 382 mm² versus 272 mm², the N1X chip is 40.4% larger, housing more shading units, TMUs, RT cores, and tensor cores. The Intel chip's advantage is in its dedicated graphics pipeline, with more ROPs and faster memory.

The release dates place the NVIDIA part two months after the Intel part. Both are listed as Active in production.

The verdict is straightforward. Pick the Intel Arc Pro B65 for professional graphics rendering, display output, and any workload requiring standard graphics API support. Pick the NVIDIA N1X 40SM for AI inference, shader-heavy compute, and tasks that need massive memory capacity or tensor acceleration. The two parts are not direct competitors; they are complementary tools for different jobs. The Intel part delivers the graphics pipeline, the NVIDIA part delivers the compute engine.