Intel Arc A570M vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A570M and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. The database shows that the Intel Arc A570M has a single OpenCL benchmark score of 58,239 points, which places it in the 88th percentile among all GPUs. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no benchmark scores recorded, placing it at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero. This makes direct performance comparisons impossible from the available measurements.

The Intel Arc A570M sits within a tight cluster of similarly performing GPUs in the database. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT by 0.3% (58,239 versus 58,392), edges out the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM by 0.3% (58,239 versus 58,085), and sits 0.5% behind the NVIDIA P102-100 (58,239 versus 58,528). It also trails the AMD Radeon PRO V710 by 0.7% (58,239 versus 58,657). These margins are minimal, indicating that the Arc A570M delivers compute performance consistent with this segment of the database.

For the NVIDIA B200 SXM6, the absence of any recorded benchmarks means its percentile rank of 50 is a default placement rather than a reflection of measured performance. The database cannot confirm how the B200 SXM6 compares to the Arc A570M in any workload. The only numeric performance indicators available for the B200 SXM6 are its theoretical specifications, which are not directly comparable to the Arc A570M's measured score.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and target entirely different segments. Intel designs the Arc A570M around the DG2-256 chip using the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation for Arc 5 Mobile. NVIDIA builds the B200 SXM6 around the GB100 chip using the Blackwell architecture, part of the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation.

The process technology differs. Intel uses a 6 nm process at TSMC with 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 42.8 million per mm². NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with 208,000 million transistors on a 1,628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm². The B200 SXM6 packs over 18 times more transistors onto a die roughly six times larger.

Memory configurations are vastly different. The Arc A570M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8,192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. That is roughly 36.6 times more bandwidth and 22.5 times more memory capacity.

Compute resources also diverge sharply. The Arc A570M has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 raster output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 592 tensor cores. The B200 SXM6 has no dedicated ray tracing cores listed, while the Arc A570M has no tensor cores listed. The B200 SXM6 has roughly 9.3 times more shading units and 4.6 times more texture mapping units, but only 0.375 times the raster output units.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The Arc A570M runs at a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The B200 SXM6 runs at a remarkably low 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost with memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The B200 SXM6 has a much higher boost clock but an extremely low base clock, reflecting its server-oriented power management.

Theoretical throughput numbers show the B200 SXM6's advantage. The Arc A570M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.65 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and 69.34 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The B200 SXM6 offers roughly 13 times the FP32 throughput and 6.5 times the FP16 throughput. Pixel rates tell a different story: the Arc A570M hits 83.20 GPixel/s while the B200 SXM6 manages only 43.92 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 166.4 GTexel/s for the Arc A570M versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s for the B200 SXM6.

Power requirements are not comparable. The Arc A570M draws 75 W TDP and uses an integrated form factor (IGP). The B200 SXM6 draws 1,000 W TDP, uses an SXM Module slot, and requires a 1,400 W suggested PSU. The Arc A570M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs differ: the Arc A570M uses portable device dependent outputs, while the B200 SXM6 has no outputs.

API support is another fundamental difference. The Arc A570M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for conventional graphics API workloads. The B200 SXM6's predecessor is listed as Server Hopper and its successor as Server Rubin, while the Arc A570M has no listed predecessor or successor.

Release dates differ by over a year. The Arc A570M launched on July 31, 2023. The B200 SXM6 launched on October 31, 2024. Both are marked as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, roughly 9.3 times more than the Intel Arc A570M's 2,048 shading units.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 provides 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth from its HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus. The Intel Arc A570M provides 224.0 GB/s from GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 support DirectX?

A: No. The database lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support as N/A for the B200 SXM6. The Intel Arc A570M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How do the FP32 throughput figures compare?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc A570M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS FP32. The B200 SXM6 offers approximately 13 times the FP32 throughput.

Q: What is the thermal design power for each?

A: The Intel Arc A570M has a 75 W TDP. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a 1,000 W TDP and a 1,400 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Intel Arc A570M has a pixel rate of 83.20 GPixel/s, notably higher than the NVIDIA B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s.

The Verdict

The database presents two GPUs with almost no overlap in purpose. The Intel Arc A570M is a mobile graphics solution with measurable OpenCL performance, a 75 W TDP, and conventional graphics API support. Its single benchmark score of 58,239 places it in the 88th percentile, with nearest rivals clustered within a 1% band. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with no recorded benchmarks, no graphics API support, a 1,000 W TDP, and a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD. Its default 50th percentile rank reflects missing data rather than measured capability.

The Arc A570M wins on pixel rate (83.20 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s), has a far lower power draw (75 W versus 1,000 W), and supports the full graphics API stack. The B200 SXM6 wins decisively on raw compute metrics: shading units, texture rate, FP32 and FP16 throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and transistor count. It also uses a more advanced 5 nm process and a newer architecture generation (Blackwell versus Xe-HPG).

Neither GPU can substitute for the other. The Arc A570M is built for graphics workloads on portable devices, with its display outputs described as portable device dependent. The B200 SXM6 has no display outputs and no graphics APIs, indicating a compute-only role. The data shows two products aimed at different markets, and any selection depends entirely on the workload.

Specification Differences

The following specification fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: DG2-256 versus GB100
• Architecture: Xe-HPG versus Blackwell
• Generation: Alchemist (Arc 5 Mobile) versus Server Blackwell (Bxx)
• Process Node: 6 nm versus 5 nm
• Transistors: 11,500 million versus 208,000 million
• Die Size: 269 mm² versus 1,628 mm²
• Transistor Density: 42.8M / mm² versus 127.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: 900 MHz versus 120 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1300 MHz versus 1830 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 8 GB versus 180 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus HBM3e
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit versus 8,192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 8.19 TB/s
• Shading Units: 2,048 versus 18,944
• TMUs: 128 versus 592
• ROPs: 64 versus 24
• RT Cores: 16 versus null
• Tensor Cores: null versus 592
• Pixel Rate: 83.20 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 166.4 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s
• FP32: 5.325 TFLOPS versus 69.34 TFLOPS
• FP16: 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 75 W versus 1,000 W
• Slot Width: IGP versus SXM Module
• Suggested PSU: null versus 1,400 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 6.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus No outputs
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A
• OpenGL: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan: 1.4 versus N/A
• Release Date: 2023-07-31 versus 2024-10-31
• Predecessor: null versus Server Hopper
• Successor: null versus Server Rubin
• Launch MSRP: null versus 34,999 USD

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A570M wins in areas tied to conventional graphics output. Its pixel rate of 83.20 GPixel/s is nearly double the B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s, which suggests an advantage in rasterization-heavy work. It also has more raster output units (64 versus 24) and dedicated ray tracing cores (16 versus none listed). Its graphics API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) versus the B200 SXM6's N/A entries makes it the only one of the two that can handle standard graphics workloads. Its 75 W TDP makes it suitable for mobile integration, and its launch date of July 2023 makes it the earlier-available product.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins on nearly every raw compute metric. Its FP32 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS is roughly 13 times the Arc A570M's 5.325 TFLOPS. Its FP16 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio is 6.5 times the Arc A570M's 10.65 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. Its texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s is 6.5 times higher. Its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is roughly 36.6 times higher, and its 180 GB memory capacity is 22.5 times larger. Its 18,944 shading units and 592 tensor cores indicate a design aimed at compute-heavy server applications. The 1,400 W suggested PSU and 1,000 W TDP reflect its data center positioning, as does its SXM Module form factor and PCIe 6.0 x16 interface.

The recorded data supports a clear split: the Arc A570M for graphics-oriented mobile workloads, the B200 SXM6 for server compute where power and form factor constraints allow for a 1,000 W module with no display output.