Intel Arc Pro B70 vs NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Pro B70 and the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs in the database. This indicates that neither part has accumulated a measurable performance dataset at this time, so a numerical comparison of their actual rendering or compute performance is not possible from the available measurements.

What can be compared directly are the theoretical peak throughput figures derived from their respective clock speeds and core configurations. The Intel Arc Pro B70 delivers 22.94 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 45% higher than the 15.82 TFLOPS produced by the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation. In FP16 workloads, the gap widens significantly: the Arc Pro B70 reaches 45.88 TFLOPS under a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation manages 15.82 TFLOPS in a 1:1 configuration. That represents a 190% advantage for the Intel part in half-precision math, a notable difference for AI inference or scientific workloads that rely on FP16 accumulation.

Pixel throughput also favors the Intel card substantially. The Arc Pro B70 achieves a pixel rate of 358.4 GPixel/s, compared to 98.88 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part, a 262% difference. Texture rate shows a similar pattern: the Arc Pro B70 produces 716.8 GTexel/s versus 247.2 GTexel/s for the RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation, a 190% lead. These figures are direct consequences of the core counts and clock speeds recorded in the database, not the result of application-level testing.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the Intel card holds a clear advantage. The Arc Pro B70 uses a 256-bit bus with GDDR6 memory running at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective), yielding 608.0 GB/s. The RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation relies on a 192-bit bus with GDDR6 at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), producing 432.0 GB/s. The Intel part is 40.7% ahead in raw memory bandwidth, which can influence performance in bandwidth-sensitive tasks such as large texture streaming or high-resolution compute kernels.

The NVIDIA part does hold one specification-level win: shading unit count. The RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation packs 5120 shading units, while the Arc Pro B70 has 4096. That is 25% more shading units on the NVIDIA side. However, the lower clock speeds on the NVIDIA part (1110 MHz base, 1545 MHz boost versus 2280 MHz base, 2800 MHz boost for Intel) more than offset that count in the FP32 throughput calculation, as the recorded TFLOPS figures demonstrate.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded specifications, the Intel Arc Pro B70 wins in every metric where a direct numerical comparison is possible: FP32 compute, FP16 compute, pixel fill rate, texture fill rate, and memory bandwidth. The 22.94 TFLOPS FP32 figure positions it as a higher-throughput compute device than the RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation, which records 15.82 TFLOPS. For workloads that are purely shader-bound or that scale with raw floating-point operations, the Intel card is the stronger choice according to the data.

The 45.88 TFLOPS FP16 output on the Arc Pro B70, achieved through a 2:1 ratio, suggests the architecture is designed to accelerate half-precision workloads. The RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation does not offer a similar FP16 boost, staying at 15.82 TFLOPS in both precisions. This makes the Intel part the better option for applications that use FP16 tensor or shader operations, such as certain machine learning inference paths or graphics effects that compute in half precision.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation wins in power efficiency and physical form factor. Its TDP is recorded at 100 W, while the Intel Arc Pro B70 draws 230 W. That is a 130 W difference, meaning the NVIDIA part consumes 56.5% less power. The RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation is also classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, whereas the Intel card is a dual-slot design requiring a single 8-pin connector and a 550 W suggested power supply. For mobile workstations or compact systems where power draw and thermal envelope are primary constraints, the NVIDIA part is the only viable option based on the recorded data.

The NVIDIA part also has a higher shading unit count (5120 versus 4096) and includes 160 tensor cores, which the Intel card does not list. For applications that specifically leverage NVIDIA's tensor core instruction set, the RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has a feature the Arc Pro B70 does not advertise in the database. Similarly, the RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 40 RT cores versus 32 on the Intel card, a 25% advantage in dedicated ray tracing hardware count.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B70 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, specifically the BMG-G31 chip, and belongs to the Battlemage (Pro Series) generation. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip and is part of the Ada-MW generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, so process technology is identical.

The die sizes differ notably. The Intel chip measures 368 mm², while the NVIDIA chip is 294 mm². The transistor count for the Intel part is listed as unknown, but the NVIDIA part records 35,800 million transistors, giving it a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². No density figure is available for the Intel chip, but the larger die area suggests a different physical layout despite the same process node.

Core configuration differs between the two architectures. The Arc Pro B70 uses 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation uses 5120 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This means the Intel part has 60% more TMUs and 100% more ROPs, while the NVIDIA part has 25% more shading units. The RT core count favors NVIDIA at 40 versus 32, and the tensor core count is exclusive to NVIDIA at 160, as the Intel card does not list a tensor core count.

Memory subsystem differences stem from bus width. The Intel card uses a 256-bit bus with 32 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA card uses a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6. The Intel memory clock is higher at 2375 MHz versus 2250 MHz, contributing to the bandwidth advantage. The Intel card also supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The Intel Arc Pro B70 has a boost clock of 2800 MHz and a base clock of 2280 MHz. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has a boost clock of 1545 MHz and a base clock of 1110 MHz. The Intel part operates at substantially higher frequencies across the board. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical per the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B70 records 22.94 TFLOPS, which is 45% higher than the 15.82 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B70 delivers 608.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 432.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus. The Intel part is 40.7% ahead.

Q: Does the NVIDIA part have any advantage in core count?

A: Yes, the RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 5120 shading units, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Pro B70 has 4096 shading units and 32 RT cores, with no tensor core count listed.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B70 has a TDP of 230 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 100 W. The NVIDIA part consumes 130 W less power.

Q: Which GPU is better for FP16 workloads?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B70 achieves 45.88 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation achieves 15.82 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The Intel part is 190% higher.

Q: Are the form factors compatible?

A: No. The Intel Arc Pro B70 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, requiring one 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested power supply. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation is an IGP with no power connectors and no recorded dimensions.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Chip: Intel BMG-G31 versus NVIDIA AD104
• Architecture: Intel Xe2-HPG versus NVIDIA Ada Lovelace
• Generation: Intel Battlemage (Pro Series) versus NVIDIA Ada-MW
• Die Size: Intel 368 mm² versus NVIDIA 294 mm²
• Transistors: Intel unknown versus NVIDIA 35,800 million
• Transistor Density: Intel null versus NVIDIA 121.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: Intel 2280 MHz versus NVIDIA 1110 MHz
• Boost Clock: Intel 2800 MHz versus NVIDIA 1545 MHz
• Memory Clock: Intel 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) versus NVIDIA 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: Intel 32 GB versus NVIDIA 12 GB
• Memory Type: Intel GDDR6 versus NVIDIA GDDR6
• Bus Width: Intel 256 bit versus NVIDIA 192 bit
• Bandwidth: Intel 608.0 GB/s versus NVIDIA 432.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: Intel 4096 versus NVIDIA 5120
• TMUs: Intel 256 versus NVIDIA 160
• ROPs: Intel 128 versus NVIDIA 64
• RT Cores: Intel 32 versus NVIDIA 40
• Tensor Cores: Intel null versus NVIDIA 160
• Pixel Rate: Intel 358.4 GPixel/s versus NVIDIA 98.88 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: Intel 716.8 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA 247.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: Intel 22.94 TFLOPS versus NVIDIA 15.82 TFLOPS
• FP16: Intel 45.88 TFLOPS (2:1) versus NVIDIA 15.82 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: Intel 230 W versus NVIDIA 100 W
• Slot Width: Intel Dual-slot versus NVIDIA IGP
• Power Connectors: Intel 1x 8-pin versus NVIDIA None
• Suggested PSU: Intel 550 W versus NVIDIA null
• Bus Interface: Intel PCIe 5.0 x16 versus NVIDIA PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Intel 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 versus NVIDIA Portable Device Dependent
• Dimensions: Intel 267 mm x 110 mm x 39 mm versus NVIDIA null
• Release Date: Intel 2026-03-25 versus NVIDIA 2023-03-20
• Production Status: Intel null versus NVIDIA Active
• Predecessor: Intel null versus NVIDIA Ampere-MW
• Successor: Intel null versus NVIDIA Blackwell-MW
• Launch MSRP: Intel 949 USD versus NVIDIA null

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two very different products. The Intel Arc Pro B70 is a high-power, desktop-oriented card with a launch MSRP of 949 USD, designed for maximum throughput. Its 22.94 TFLOPS FP32, 45.88 TFLOPS FP16, 608.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 32 GB of memory place it far ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation in every raw performance metric in the database. Any workload that is bound by shader compute, memory bandwidth, or half-precision math will see a substantial advantage from the Intel part, with leads ranging from 40% to 262% depending on the specific metric.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation is the opposite in almost every way. It draws 100 W, requires no power connectors, fits as an IGP, and has no recorded dimensions. Its 15.82 TFLOPS FP32 and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are lower than the Intel card, but the power envelope is a fraction of the Intel part's 230 W TDP. For mobile workstations or any system where power delivery and thermal dissipation are fixed constraints, the NVIDIA part is the only choice that matches those requirements. The 5120 shading units, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores also give it a feature set that the Intel card does not list.

Users who prioritize maximum compute and memory throughput should select the Intel Arc Pro B70. Users who need a low-power, integrated solution for a mobile platform should select the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation. The data does not indicate a middle ground: the Intel card cannot operate within the NVIDIA part's power budget, and the NVIDIA part cannot match the Intel card's performance ceilings.