Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile vs NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows an extraordinary performance disparity between the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile and the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC. The NVIDIA part delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, placing it in the 100th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile carries no recorded benchmark scores in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile ranking of 50. This means direct numerical comparison is limited to the NVIDIA side, but the architectural specifications make the gap obvious.

The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC outperforms its nearest rivals by substantial margins. It sits 7% ahead of the NVIDIA B200, which averages 345,482 points. Against the NVIDIA H200 NVL, the B300 leads by 10.4%, with the H200 scoring 334,891. The AMD Instinct MI300X trails by 16.3%, averaging 317,994 points. The NVIDIA L40S, with an average score of 295,763, is 25% behind the B300. These deltas confirm that the B300 is not merely a high-end part; it is the fastest accelerator in the database's recorded measurements.

For the Intel part, the absence of benchmark entries means no head-to-head scores exist. The database lists zero wins for each side in head-to-head testing. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is an integrated graphics processor designed for low-power mobile systems, while the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is a server-grade accelerator module. The specification sheet alone separates them by orders of magnitude in nearly every measurable category.

FAQ

Q: What is the Geekbench OpenCL score of the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC?

A: The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 369,831, which places it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmarks for the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, with an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile ranking of 50.

Q: How does the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC compare to the NVIDIA B200?

A: The B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831, which is 7% higher than the NVIDIA B200's average score of 345,482.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses system shared memory, with its memory type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses 288 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each part?

A: The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W and is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has a TDP of 1100 W and a suggested PSU rating of 1500 W, using an SXM Module slot width.

Q: Which API support do the two GPUs offer?

A: The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its server-focused design with no display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Twin Lake chip based on the Xe-LP architecture, belonging to the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses the GB110 chip based on the Blackwell Ultra architecture, part of the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Transistor counts could not be more different. The Intel part lists its transistor count as unknown, and its die size is also unknown. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC integrates 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter. This density figure is only recorded for the NVIDIA part.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 4 raster output units. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. It also includes 592 tensor cores, though no dedicated ray tracing core count is listed.

Clock behavior differs fundamentally. The Intel part runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 1665 MHz and a boost clock of 2032 MHz. Memory clocks also diverge: the Intel GPU uses system shared memory, while the NVIDIA GPU runs its HBM3e at 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective data rate.

Compute throughput tells the story of scale. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile delivers a pixel rate of 4.000 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 12.00 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 384.0 GFLOPS, and FP16 performance is 768.0 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC achieves a pixel rate of 48.77 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 76.99 TFLOPS, and FP16 performance is also 76.99 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

The bus interface separates the two as well. The Intel part uses a Ring Bus, typical for integrated graphics. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC uses PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs also differ completely: the Intel part has portable device dependent outputs, while the NVIDIA part has no outputs at all, confirming its headless server role.

Process node advantages belong to NVIDIA. A 5 nm TSMC process versus a 10 nm Intel process explains a significant portion of the density and efficiency gap, though the Intel part's 6 W TDP versus the NVIDIA part's 1100 W TDP reflects entirely different design goals.

Specification Differences

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

• Manufacturer: Intel versus NVIDIA
• Chip: Twin Lake versus GB110
• Architecture: Xe-LP versus Blackwell Ultra
• Generation: HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) versus Server Blackwell (Bxx)
• Process Node: 10 nm versus 5 nm
• Foundry: Intel versus TSMC
• Transistors: unknown versus 208,000 million
• Die Size: unknown versus 1628 mm²
• Transistor Density: null versus 127.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: 300 MHz versus 1665 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1000 MHz versus 2032 MHz
• Memory Clock: System Shared versus 2000 MHz 8 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: System Shared versus 288 GB
• Memory Type: System Shared versus HBM3e
• Memory Bus Width: System Shared versus 8192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: System Dependent versus 8.19 TB/s
• Shading Units: 192 versus 18944
• TMUs: 12 versus 592
• ROPs: 4 versus 24
• Tensor Cores: null versus 592
• Pixel Rate: 4.000 GPixel/s versus 48.77 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 12.00 GTexel/s versus 1,202.9 GTexel/s
• FP32: 384.0 GFLOPS versus 76.99 TFLOPS
• FP16: 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) versus 76.99 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 6 W versus 1100 W
• Slot Width: IGP versus SXM Module
• Suggested PSU: null versus 1500 W
• Bus Interface: Ring Bus versus PCIe 6.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus No outputs
• DirectX: 12 (12_1) versus N/A
• OpenGL: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan: 1.4 versus N/A
• Release Date: 2024-12-31T17:00:00.000Z versus 2025-09-10T17:00:00.000Z
• Predecessor: null versus Server Hopper
• Successor: null versus Server Rubin
• Percentile: 50 versus 100
• Average Benchmark Score: 0 versus 369,831

Fields that are identical or null in both include series, codename, game clock, RT cores, power connectors, dimensions, and launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The database measurements make the verdict straightforward. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is the dominant compute part, with a recorded benchmark score that places it in the top percentile of all GPUs. Its 76.99 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 288 GB of HBM3e memory, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth position it for server workloads that demand maximum throughput. Its 1100 W TDP and 1500 W suggested PSU confirm that it is designed for data center installations, not desktop or mobile environments.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile serves a completely different purpose. With a 6 W TDP, integrated design, and system shared memory, it targets low-power mobile devices where basic display output and light graphics tasks are sufficient. Its 384.0 GFLOPS FP32 performance is negligible next to the B300, but that is not the point of the part. The Intel GPU consumes roughly 0.5% of the NVIDIA part's power budget and requires no discrete power connectors.

Who should pick which depends entirely on workload. The data shows that the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is the only choice for high-throughput compute, machine learning inference, or any task that can leverage its 592 tensor cores and 76.99 TFLOPS FP16 performance. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is the only choice for ultra-low-power portable devices where the CPU's integrated graphics must suffice.

There is no overlap in their intended markets. The Intel part's API support for DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 makes it usable for consumer graphics on mobile platforms. The NVIDIA part lists no API support, reinforcing its role as a compute accelerator without display functionality.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 6 W TDP is the lowest recorded among the two, and its IGP slot width means no additional cooling or power delivery hardware is required. It supports display outputs, making it functional for portable devices. Its release date of 2024-12-31T17:00:00.000Z places it earlier than the NVIDIA part, and its 10 nm process, while older, is paired with a design that fits within a system's shared memory architecture. For any mobile device that needs graphics output without a discrete GPU, this part is the only viable option in this comparison.

NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC wins on every raw performance metric. Its FP32 compute of 76.99 TFLOPS is 200 times higher than the Intel part's 384.0 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 1,202.9 GTexel/s compares to 12.00 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 48.77 GPixel/s compares to 4.000 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s versus system dependent bandwidth is not a contest. The 288 GB memory capacity dwarfs any system shared allocation. The 592 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI workloads that the Intel part lacks entirely.

Server workloads favor the B300. Its 100th percentile ranking and 7% lead over the B200, 10.4% lead over the H200 NVL, 16.3% lead over the MI300X, and 25% lead over the L40S confirm that it is currently the fastest accelerator in the database's measurements. Its PCIe 6.0 x16 interface, 1500 W suggested PSU, and SXM Module form factor all point to rack-mounted deployment.

Mobile workloads favor the Intel part. No benchmark scores exist for it, but its design parameters (6 W TDP, Ring Bus, system shared memory, portable device dependent outputs) indicate a part meant for battery-powered systems. Its 192 shading units and 12 TMUs are sufficient for basic rendering tasks at low resolutions.

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC is a server compute accelerator with no display outputs and no consumer API support. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is an integrated mobile GPU with full consumer API support and minimal power draw. Each part wins in its respective domain, and neither can substitute for the other.