Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design vs Intel Arc Pro B50
Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
Intel Arc Pro B50
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Performance Per Dollar Intel Arc Pro B50
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Intel Arc Pro B50 is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The Intel Arc Pro B50 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Intel Arc Pro B50 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Turing (2018−2022) / 12nm) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Xe2 (2024) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Intel Arc Pro B50 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design and Intel Arc Pro B50
Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 780 MHz to 1380 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,173 points.
Intel Arc Pro B50
The Intel Arc Pro B50 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 5 2025. It features the Xe2 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1700 MHz to 2600 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 70W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,208 points. Launch price was $349.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design scores 12,173 and the Intel Arc Pro B50 reaches 12,208 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Intel Arc Pro B50 uses Xe2, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 2,048 (Intel Arc Pro B50). Raw compute: 7.066 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 10.65 TFLOPS (Intel Arc Pro B50). Boost clocks: 1380 MHz vs 2600 MHz. Ray tracing: 40 RT cores (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 16 (Intel Arc Pro B50) with 320 Tensor cores.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 12,173 | 12,208 |
| Architecture | Turing | Xe2 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+25% | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.066 TFLOPS | 10.65 TFLOPS+51% |
| Boost Clock | 1380 MHz | 2600 MHz+88% |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 160+25% | 128 |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 4 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 40+150% | 16 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Intel Arc Pro B50 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Intel Arc Pro B50 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | XeSS |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 8 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 4 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 12.2 (Intel Arc Pro B50). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs Dual Arc Media Engine (Intel Arc Pro B50). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs Dual Arc Media Engine. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Intel Arc Pro B50).
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | Dual Arc Media Engine |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | Dual Arc Media Engine |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design draws 80W versus the Intel Arc Pro B50's 70W — a 13.3% difference. The Intel Arc Pro B50 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 500W (Intel Arc Pro B50). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 167mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 80W | 70W-13% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 167mm |
| Height | 0mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 152.2 | 174.4+15% |
Value Analysis
The Intel Arc Pro B50 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design | Intel Arc Pro B50 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $349 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $349 |
| Codename | TU104 | BMG-G21 |
| Release | May 27 2019 | September 5 2025 |
| Ranking | #220 | #221 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design and Intel Arc Pro B50
