Intel Arc A530M vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc A530M and NVIDIA B200 SXM6 serve entirely different purposes, and the data confirms this decisively. The Arc A530M is a mobile graphics processor with recorded benchmark scores, while the B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with no recorded benchmarks in the database. The B200 SXM6 targets compute-heavy server workloads with its massive memory capacity and tensor core count, while the Arc A530M addresses mobile graphics with a conventional feature set.

For users seeking a mobile GPU with active DirectX 12 Ultimate support, the Arc A530M is the functional choice. It delivers a 49,735 Geekbench OpenCL score and 43,492 Geekbench Vulkan score, placing it in the 85th percentile of all GPUs. The B200 SXM6, by contrast, has no benchmark entries, no display outputs, and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, making it unsuitable for client graphics workloads.

For server deployment focused on AI or high-performance computing, the B200 SXM6 dominates on paper. It offers 180 GB of HBM3e memory, 592 tensor cores, and 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. The Arc A530M cannot compete in these metrics. The data shows two products with zero overlap in intended use cases.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a common foundry, TSMC, but diverge in nearly every architectural decision. The Arc A530M uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm process, built around the DG2-256 chip. The B200 SXM6 uses NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture on a 5 nm process, built around the GB100 chip. The process node difference is modest, but the transistor counts are not. The B200 SXM6 integrates 208,000 million transistors across a 1628 mm² die, while the Arc A530M contains 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die. Transistor density reflects this: the B200 SXM6 achieves 127.8M transistors per mm², while the Arc A530M reaches 42.8M per mm².

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The Arc A530M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with a 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the Arc A530M runs at a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost with 14 Gbps effective memory speed, while the B200 SXM6 runs at a 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost with 8 Gbps effective memory speed. The B200's lower base clock but higher boost clock reflects a server-oriented power profile.

Compute resources differ sharply. The Arc A530M has 1536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, 48 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores, but no dedicated ray tracing cores listed. The B200 SXM6 also has no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, while the Arc A530M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The physical form factors reflect their roles. The Arc A530M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with portable device dependent display outputs and a 65 W TDP. The B200 SXM6 is an SXM module with no display outputs, a 1000 W TDP, and a suggested power supply of 1400 W. The bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Arc A530M versus PCIe 6.0 x16 for the B200 SXM6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher benchmark scores?

A: Only the Intel Arc A530M has recorded benchmark scores. It achieves 49,735 in Geekbench OpenCL and 43,492 in Geekbench Vulkan. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no benchmark entries in the database.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Arc A530M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory. The B200 SXM6 also has a much wider 8192-bit bus and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, compared to the Arc A530M's 128-bit bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX?

A: The Arc A530M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Arc A530M has a 65 W TDP. The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 1400 W.

Q: How do the compute capabilities compare?

A: The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1) performance. The Arc A530M delivers 3.994 TFLOPS of FP32 and 7.987 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1). The B200 SXM6 also has 592 tensor cores, while the Arc A530M has none.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The Arc A530M was released on July 31, 2023. The B200 SXM6 was released on October 31, 2024.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in every major specification category. The Arc A530M uses a 6 nm process; the B200 SXM6 uses a 5 nm process. Transistor counts are 11,500 million versus 208,000 million. Die size is 269 mm² versus 1628 mm². Transistor density is 42.8M per mm² versus 127.8M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: the Arc A530M has a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost, while the B200 SXM6 has a 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective for the Arc A530M, versus 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective for the B200 SXM6.

Memory configuration is starkly different. The Arc A530M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ: the Arc A530M has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores, with no ray tracing cores listed.

Rates and throughput diverge. The Arc A530M achieves 62.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 124.8 GTexel/s texture rate. The B200 SXM6 achieves 43.92 GPixel/s pixel rate and 1,083.4 GTexel/s texture rate. FP32 performance is 3.994 TFLOPS for the Arc A530M versus 69.34 TFLOPS for the B200 SXM6. FP16 performance is 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Arc A530M versus 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) for the B200 SXM6.

Power and form factor differ: 65 W TDP and IGP slot width for the Arc A530M, versus 1000 W TDP, SXM Module slot width, and 1400 W suggested PSU for the B200 SXM6. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the Arc A530M and none for the B200 SXM6.

API support differs entirely: the Arc A530M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three.

The B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD. The Arc A530M has no launch MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the Arc A530M and B200 SXM6. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counts are zero for both products. This absence reflects the fundamental incompatibility of the two products in benchmark environments.

The Arc A530M does have standalone benchmark results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 49,735, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 43,492. The average benchmark score across its entries is 46,614. The B200 SXM6 has no benchmark entries, an average benchmark score of zero, and a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

The Arc A530M's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its performance. The AMD Radeon RX 5600M has an average score of 46,601, which is a 0% delta from the Arc A530M's average. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M scores 46,702, a -0.2% delta. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 46,043, a 1.2% delta. The NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation scores 45,972, a 1.4% delta. These deltas indicate the Arc A530M sits in a tight competitive cluster among mobile and workstation GPUs.

The B200 SXM6's percentile ranking of 50th among all GPUs, combined with zero benchmark scores, indicates it is not evaluated through the same benchmark suite as the Arc A530M. The recorded data cannot support a direct performance comparison between these two products.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc A530M wins in client graphics scenarios. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 enable standard graphics workloads. Its display outputs, listed as portable device dependent, allow visual output. Its 65 W TDP makes it suitable for mobile integration. Its benchmark results demonstrate real-world graphics performance in the 85th percentile of all GPUs.

The B200 SXM6 wins in server compute scenarios. Its 180 GB of HBM3e memory with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth supports large data sets. Its 592 tensor cores and 69.34 TFLOPS of FP16 performance target AI and machine learning workloads. Its 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance supports high-precision computing. Its 1,083.4 GTexel/s texture rate and 43.92 GPixel/s pixel rate reflect raw throughput. Its PCIe 6.0 x16 interface and 1400 W suggested PSU indicate a high-power server environment.

The data shows no overlap where one product could substitute for the other. The Arc A530M's 12 ray tracing cores and graphics API support make it a mobile graphics solution. The B200 SXM6's lack of display outputs and graphics API support makes it a compute accelerator. Users with graphics rendering needs should select the Arc A530M. Users with massive parallel compute needs should select the B200 SXM6.

The Arc A530M's average benchmark score of 46,614 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (46,601), AMD Radeon RX 6550M (46,702), NVIDIA RTX A2000 (46,043), and NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45,972). This cluster indicates the Arc A530M delivers competitive performance within its mobile graphics segment. The B200 SXM6 has no comparable benchmark data, so its performance must be assessed through its specification sheet alone.

The production status for both GPUs is Active, meaning both remain available. The Arc A530M's release date of July 31, 2023 predates the B200 SXM6's release date of October 31, 2024. The B200 SXM6 has a predecessor, Server Hopper, and a successor, Server Rubin, while the Arc A530M lists neither. These lifecycle details reinforce the distinct product categories.