Intel Arc Pro B70 vs NVIDIA H100 CNX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark runs for the Intel Arc Pro B70 and the NVIDIA H100 CNX. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the wins counter for each side is zero. This absence of measured performance data means the comparison must rest on the architectural and specification fields captured in the database, not on empirical frame rates or compute workloads.

What the data does provide is a clear split in raw compute capacity. The NVIDIA H100 CNX delivers 53.84 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, which is 2.35 times the 22.94 TFLOPS recorded for the Intel Arc Pro B70. In FP16, the gap widens dramatically: the H100 CNX reaches 215.4 TFLOPS under a 4:1 ratio, while the Arc Pro B70 manages 45.88 TFLOPS under a 2:1 ratio. That places the H100 CNX roughly 4.7 times ahead in half-precision work, a margin that reflects its tensor core focus.

Memory bandwidth tells a similar story. The H100 CNX moves data at 2.04 TB/s over a 5120-bit HBM2e interface, compared to the Arc Pro B70's 608.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 bus. The H100 CNX holds a 3.36 times bandwidth advantage. Capacity also favors NVIDIA: 80 GB versus 32 GB, a 2.5 times difference.

The texture rate comparison narrows the gap. The H100 CNX delivers 841.3 GTexel/s, while the Arc Pro B70 reaches 716.8 GTexel/s, a margin of only 17.4% in favor of NVIDIA. Pixel rate flips the result. The Arc Pro B70 outputs 358.4 GPixel/s, which is 8.1 times the H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s. This inversion reflects the ROP count: 128 ROPs on Intel versus 24 on NVIDIA.

Clock speeds show a contrasting design philosophy. The Intel part runs at a 2280 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part idles at a 690 MHz base and reaches 1845 MHz boost. The Arc Pro B70's boost clock is 51.8% higher than the H100 CNX's boost. This explains why the Intel GPU achieves competitive texture throughput despite far fewer shading units: 4096 versus 14592.

The H100 CNX has 3.56 times more shading units, 1.78 times more TMUs (456 versus 256), and 456 tensor cores, while the Arc Pro B70 lists 32 RT cores and no tensor core count. The H100 CNX lists no RT cores at all. Shader count alone does not dictate the pixel rate result, as the H100 CNX's 24 ROPs bottleneck that path.

Power draw differs substantially. The H100 CNX is rated at 350 W TDP with a suggested 750 W PSU. The Arc Pro B70 draws 230 W TDP with a suggested 550 W PSU. The NVIDIA part consumes 52.2% more power while delivering 2.35 times the FP32 and 3.36 times the bandwidth, which indicates a favorable compute-per-watt ratio for the server part in those specific metrics. The Intel part, however, offers far higher pixel throughput per watt.

Both cards use a 5 nm process from TSMC. The H100 CNX die measures 814 mm² with 80,000 million transistors, yielding a density of 98.3 million transistors per mm². The Arc Pro B70 die is 368 mm² with transistor count listed as unknown. The H100 CNX's die is 2.21 times larger. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 interfaces. Both are dual-slot designs with 267 mm length. The H100 CNX measures 111 mm height; the Arc Pro B70 is 110 mm.

The Verdict

The database shows no benchmark wins for either card because no benchmark data exists for either entry. A verdict must therefore derive from the fixed specification fields. The H100 CNX is the clear compute leader: 2.35 times FP32, 4.7 times FP16, 3.36 times memory bandwidth, and 2.5 times memory capacity. It also carries 456 tensor cores, a feature the Arc Pro B70 does not list. Any workload that relies on FP16 tensor math, large HBM pools, or bandwidth saturation would favor the NVIDIA part based on these recorded numbers.

The Arc Pro B70 wins in pixel rate by an 8.1 times margin, offers display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1), and consumes 34.3% less power. It also includes 32 RT cores, which the H100 CNX lacks. The Intel card is the only one of the two with a DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API set; the H100 CNX lists null for all three APIs. This makes the Arc Pro B70 the only viable option for graphics-oriented workloads among these two entries, while the H100 CNX appears purpose-built for headless compute.

The release dates differ: the H100 CNX entered the database on 2023-03-20, and the Arc Pro B70 on 2026-03-25. The H100 CNX has an active production status and lists predecessors and successors (Server Ada, Server Blackwell). The Arc Pro B70's production status is null. The H100 CNX shows no display outputs, reinforcing its server role. The Intel card has a launch MSRP of 949 USD, which appears in the record once; the NVIDIA card has no launch MSRP field value.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B70 uses the BMG-G31 chip built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage Pro Series generation. The NVIDIA H100 CNX uses the GH100 chip built on the Hopper architecture, part of the Server Hopper generation. Both use a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the design goals diverge sharply.

The H100 CNX packs 80,000 million transistors into an 814 mm² die, giving a density of 98.3 million transistors per mm². The Arc Pro B70 packs an unknown transistor count into a 368 mm² die. The H100 CNX's larger die accommodates 14,592 shading units, 456 TMUs, 456 tensor cores, and only 24 ROPs. This configuration favors dense math over pixel output. The Arc Pro B70 uses 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 RT cores, a layout that balances rasterization with ray tracing and general compute.

The H100 CNX's tensor core count of 456 aligns with its FP16 output of 215.4 TFLOPS at a 4:1 ratio. The Arc Pro B70 lists no tensor core count and achieves 45.88 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The presence of RT cores on the Intel part (32) and their absence on the NVIDIA part signals different target workloads: real-time rendering on Intel, data center compute on NVIDIA.

The H100 CNX uses HBM2e memory across a 5120-bit bus, a wide and power-hungry interface that reaches 2.04 TB/s. The Arc Pro B70 uses GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus, a narrower interface that reaches 608.0 GB/s. The memory clock rates reflect this: the H100 CNX runs at 1593 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective, while the Arc Pro B70 runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective. The GDDR6 runs much faster per pin but has far fewer pins.

The H100 CNX lists no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database. The Arc Pro B70 lists full graphics API support and multiple display connectors. This is a fundamental architectural fork: one chip is a compute accelerator with no graphics path, the other is a graphics-capable workstation GPU.

The power connector types differ: the H100 CNX uses an 8-pin EPS, the Arc Pro B70 uses a single 8-pin. The H100 CNX has a 350 W TDP and suggests a 750 W PSU. The Arc Pro B70 has a 230 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU. The H100 CNX's boost clock of 1845 MHz is far lower than the Arc Pro B70's 2800 MHz, which indicates the NVIDIA chip relies on massive parallelism rather than high clocks.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two entries.

• Chip: BMG-G31 on Intel, GH100 on NVIDIA.
• Architecture: Xe2-HPG on Intel, Hopper on NVIDIA.
• Generation: Battlemage (Pro Series) on Intel, Server Hopper on NVIDIA.
• Transistors: unknown on Intel, 80,000 million on NVIDIA.
• Die size: 368 mm² on Intel, 814 mm² on NVIDIA.
• Transistor density: null on Intel, 98.3M / mm² on NVIDIA.
• Base clock: 2280 MHz on Intel, 690 MHz on NVIDIA.
• Boost clock: 2800 MHz on Intel, 1845 MHz on NVIDIA.
• Memory clock: 2375 MHz / 19 Gbps effective on Intel, 1593 MHz / 3.2 Gbps effective on NVIDIA.
• Memory size: 32 GB on Intel, 80 GB on NVIDIA.
• Memory type: GDDR6 on Intel, HBM2e on NVIDIA.
• Memory bus width: 256 bit on Intel, 5120 bit on NVIDIA.
• Memory bandwidth: 608.0 GB/s on Intel, 2.04 TB/s on NVIDIA.
• Shading units: 4096 on Intel, 14592 on NVIDIA.
• TMUs: 256 on Intel, 456 on NVIDIA.
• ROPs: 128 on Intel, 24 on NVIDIA.
• RT cores: 32 on Intel, null on NVIDIA.
• Tensor cores: null on Intel, 456 on NVIDIA.
• Pixel rate: 358.4 GPixel/s on Intel, 44.28 GPixel/s on NVIDIA.
• Texture rate: 716.8 GTexel/s on Intel, 841.3 GTexel/s on NVIDIA.
• FP32: 22.94 TFLOPS on Intel, 53.84 TFLOPS on NVIDIA.
• FP16: 45.88 TFLOPS (2:1) on Intel, 215.4 TFLOPS (4:1) on NVIDIA.
• TDP: 230 W on Intel, 350 W on NVIDIA.
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin on Intel, 8-pin EPS on NVIDIA.
• Suggested PSU: 550 W on Intel, 750 W on NVIDIA.
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 on Intel; No outputs on NVIDIA.
• APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4 on Intel; null on NVIDIA.
• Height: 110 mm on Intel, 111 mm on NVIDIA.
• Width: 39 mm on Intel, null on NVIDIA.
• Production status: null on Intel, Active on NVIDIA.
• Release date: 2026-03-25 on Intel, 2023-03-20 on NVIDIA.
• Predecessor: null on Intel, Server Ada on NVIDIA.
• Successor: null on Intel, Server Blackwell on NVIDIA.
• Launch MSRP: 949 USD on Intel, null on NVIDIA.

Shared fields include a 5 nm TSMC process, PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, dual-slot width, and 267 mm length. The Arc Pro B70 lists a 39 mm width; the H100 CNX does not.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA H100 CNX, at 53.84 TFLOPS versus 22.94 TFLOPS for the Intel Arc Pro B70. That is a 2.35 times advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B70 support display output?

A: Yes. The database lists 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The NVIDIA H100 CNX lists no display outputs.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The H100 CNX has 80 GB of HBM2e, while the Arc Pro B70 has 32 GB of GDDR6. The NVIDIA card holds 2.5 times more memory.

Q: Which card draws more power?

A: The H100 CNX is rated at 350 W TDP with a suggested 750 W PSU. The Arc Pro B70 is rated at 230 W TDP with a suggested 550 W PSU. The NVIDIA card draws 52.2% more power.

Q: Does the Arc Pro B70 have tensor cores?

A: The database does not list a tensor core count for the Arc Pro B70. The H100 CNX lists 456 tensor cores.

Q: Which card has higher pixel throughput?

A: The Arc Pro B70 outputs 358.4 GPixel/s, which is 8.1 times the H100 CNX's 44.28 GPixel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA H100 CNX wins in every compute-heavy metric recorded. FP32 is 2.35 times higher. FP16 is 4.7 times higher. Memory bandwidth is 3.36 times higher. Memory capacity is 2.5 times higher. Shading units are 3.56 times more numerous. TMUs are 1.78 times more numerous. Tensor cores exist on this part and not on the rival. Texture rate is 17.4% higher. The die is 2.21 times larger, and the transistor count is 80,000 million versus unknown. The H100 CNX also has an active production status and a defined predecessor and successor in the database.

The Intel Arc Pro B70 wins in pixel rate by an 8.1 times margin, driven by 128 ROPs versus 24. It wins in clock speed: base clock is 3.3 times higher (2280 MHz versus 690 MHz), and boost clock is 51.8% higher (2800 MHz versus 1845 MHz). It wins in memory clock rate: 2375 MHz versus 1593 MHz, with 19 Gbps effective versus 3.2 Gbps. It is the only card with RT cores (32), display outputs, and graphics API support. It consumes 34.3% less power and suggests a lower PSU requirement. It also carries a launch MSRP of 949 USD, while the H100 CNX has none recorded.

The use-case split follows directly from these numbers. The H100 CNX suits workloads that need massive FP16 throughput, large HBM pools, or high memory bandwidth, such as dense tensor math or large model inference, based strictly on the recorded fields. The Arc Pro B70 suits workloads that need rasterization, ray tracing, display output, or pixel fill rates, such as workstation graphics or rendering, based on the same fields. The H100 CNX has no display path and no graphics API entries, so it cannot serve as a primary graphics output device. The Arc Pro B70 lacks the FP16 and bandwidth headroom of the H100 CNX, so it cannot match the server part in half-precision throughput.

The data does not include any benchmark scores, so neither card can be declared a winner in measured performance. The specification comparison provides the only available signal. For compute density, the H100 CNX dominates. For rasterization and graphics features, the Arc Pro B70 dominates. The release date gap (2023 versus 2026) and the active production status of the H100 CNX add context, but the core distinction remains architectural: a server accelerator with no outputs versus a graphics-capable GPU with a full display suite.