Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server. Both entries in the database contain empty benchmark arrays, and the wins counters for each side are zero. Without measured performance scores, the comparison must rely on the architectural and specification data available in the database.

The Intel part delivers a higher raw compute ceiling in certain workloads. Its FP32 throughput is listed at 44.44 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA part reaches 50.70 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card holds a 14.1% advantage in FP32 peak output based on the recorded figures. Texture rate tells a different story: the Intel accelerator produces 1,388.8 GTexel/s against 792.1 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, a 75.3% lead for Intel in texture fill work. Pixel rate heavily favors NVIDIA at 270.5 GPixel/s, while the Intel part is recorded at 0 MPixel/s, indicating no conventional raster output pipeline.

Memory bandwidth is a decisive split. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 provides 2.46 TB/s over an 8192-bit HBM2e interface, versus 800.3 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR7 bus for the NVIDIA board. That translates to a 207.4% bandwidth advantage for Intel. Capacity also differs sharply: 96 GB on Intel versus 32 GB on NVIDIA. The NVIDIA card compensates with a lower 165 W TDP compared to 450 W for Intel, a 63.3% reduction in power draw.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 wins in scenarios that demand massive memory capacity and extreme bandwidth. The 96 GB HBM2e pool and 2.46 TB/s bandwidth suit large model inference, high-resolution volumetric data, and workloads where the entire dataset must reside in GPU memory. The 8192-bit bus width is the widest recorded in this comparison, and the 1,388.8 GTexel/s texture rate indicates strong fill-bound throughput for compute kernels that stress texture units. The 14336 shading units and 896 TMUs also point to a design built for parallel throughput rather than latency-sensitive rasterization.

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server wins in efficiency and rasterization-oriented tasks. Its 50.70 TFLOPS FP32 output is the higher peak of the two, and the 270.5 GPixel/s pixel rate confirms a functional ROP pipeline, something the Intel part lacks entirely with its 0 MPixel/s rating. The 112 ROPs on NVIDIA versus 0 on Intel make the NVIDIA card the only one capable of conventional display or pixel-output workloads. The 82 RT cores and 328 tensor cores give NVIDIA dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations, whereas the Intel part lists no tensor cores and 112 RT cores. The 165 W TDP means the NVIDIA card fits into power-constrained server chassis with a 450 W suggested PSU, against Intel's 850 W suggestion.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different foundries and process nodes. Intel uses its own 10 nm process for the Ponte Vecchio chip, fabricated in-house, while NVIDIA uses TSMC's 5 nm node for the GB203 chip. Die size diverges sharply: Intel's Ponte Vecchio measures 1280 mm² with 100,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 78.1M per mm². NVIDIA's GB203 is 378 mm² with 45,600 million transistors, achieving 120.6M per mm². The Intel die is 3.4 times larger physically, but the NVIDIA chip packs 54.5% more transistors per square millimeter.

Memory technology differs completely. Intel uses HBM2e with a 1200 MHz base memory clock and 2.4 Gbps effective data rate, while NVIDIA uses GDDR7 at 1563 MHz and 25 Gbps effective. The Intel memory bus is 8192 bits wide versus 256 bits on NVIDIA, which explains the bandwidth gap despite the slower per-pin rate. Intel's FP16 throughput equals its FP32 at 44.44 TFLOPS (1:1), and NVIDIA matches its FP16 to FP32 at 50.70 TFLOPS (1:1), so neither side gains a half-precision advantage.

API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan. Intel lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan version recorded. NVIDIA lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 interfaces. Physical formats diverge: Intel is an OAM Module with no display outputs, while NVIDIA is single-slot with dimensions of 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width, also with no display outputs. Intel has no power connector listed, while NVIDIA uses a single 16-pin connector.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 provides 2.46 TB/s over an 8192-bit HBM2e bus, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server delivers 800.3 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR7 interface.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The NVIDIA card reaches 50.70 TFLOPS, which is 14.1% higher than the Intel part's 44.44 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server has a 165 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 450 W, versus Intel's 450 W TDP and 850 W suggested PSU.

Q: Does either card support display output?

A: No. Both the Intel and NVIDIA parts list no display outputs.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: Intel has 96 GB of HBM2e, while NVIDIA has 32 GB of GDDR7. Intel offers three times the capacity.

Q: Which card has ray tracing hardware?

A: Both list RT cores: Intel has 112, NVIDIA has 82. NVIDIA additionally lists 328 tensor cores, while Intel does not record any tensor cores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 | NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server |

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

| Chip | Ponte Vecchio | GB203 |

| Architecture | Generation 12.5 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | 100,000 million | 45,600 million |

| Die Size | 1280 mm² | 378 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 78.1M / mm² | 120.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 750 MHz | 1215 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1550 MHz | 2415 MHz |

| Memory Size | 96 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2e | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 8192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 2.46 TB/s | 800.3 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1200 MHz, 2.4 Gbps effective | 1563 MHz, 25 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 14336 | 10496 |

| TMUs | 896 | 328 |

| ROPs | 0 | 112 |

| RT Cores | 112 | 82 |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 328 |

| Pixel Rate | 0 MPixel/s | 270.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,388.8 GTexel/s | 792.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 44.44 TFLOPS | 50.70 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 44.44 TFLOPS (1:1) | 50.70 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 450 W | 165 W |

| Slot Width | OAM Module | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 850 W | 450 W |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | Not listed | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2023-01-09 | 2026-03-16 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | Server Hopper |

| Successor | H3C Graphics | Server Rubin |

The Verdict

The data indicates two fundamentally different server accelerators. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1350 targets memory-bound workloads that need the full 96 GB HBM2e pool and 2.46 TB/s bandwidth. Its 1,388.8 GTexel/s texture rate and 14336 shading units make it a throughput engine for large-scale compute. The absence of ROPs and display outputs confirms it is not designed for pixel output or graphics rendering.

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell Server targets efficiency and balanced compute. Its 50.70 TFLOPS FP32 peak exceeds Intel's by 14.1%, its 270.5 GPixel/s pixel rate provides actual raster capability, and its 328 tensor cores enable dedicated tensor workloads. The 165 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU allow deployment in power-constrained server racks. The 5 nm TSMC process with 120.6M transistors per mm² shows a denser, more modern fabrication approach than Intel's 10 nm node with 78.1M per mm².

For organizations prioritizing memory capacity and bandwidth, the Intel part is the stronger choice based on the recorded specifications. For organizations prioritizing raw FP32 throughput, pixel output, tensor acceleration, and lower power consumption, the NVIDIA part leads. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 and lack display outputs, so system integration depends on workload demands rather than interface compatibility. The percentile data places both at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, but with no benchmark scores recorded, the percentile is a placeholder rather than a measured ranking.