Intel
Intel Arc Pro B60 vs Radeon R9 Nano
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
R9 Nano
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc Pro B60 and R9 Nano across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Arc Pro B60 outperforms R9 Nano by ~1% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+1%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Partially verifiedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 16Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Equal catalog scores
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Arc Pro B60
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 / oneAPI · Intel XeSS
Reasons to consider R9 Nano
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
Intel
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Memory capacity
5241
8778
10050
Graphics card ranking
Positions 25–30of 30
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon R9 Nano
66 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
52Better
41
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
44Better
36
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
41Better
34
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
87Better
78
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
54
54
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
ArchitectureBetter
Process nodeBetter
Release date
VRAMBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
TFLOPSBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Max monitors
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
Device class
Memory type
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Compute API
Upscaling
Max resolution
HDMI
DisplayPort
USB Type-C
Length
Thickness
Power connector
Transistor count
Die size
Base clock
Boost clock
Recommended PSU
Memory cache
Power consumption—
Launch price—
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Arc Pro B60 and R9 Nano across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
Arc Pro B60R9 Nano
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
—
188 FPS
1080p Ultra
—
132 FPS
1440p Ultra
—
87 FPS
4K Ultra
—
35 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Arc Pro B60—R9 Nano188 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano132 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano87 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano35 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Arc Pro B60—R9 Nano122 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano105 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano63 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano23 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Arc Pro B60—R9 Nano153 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano99 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano78 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano51 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyArc Pro B60—R9 Nano99 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano83 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano56 FPSArc Pro B60—R9 Nano24 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100524124%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100604138%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100654439%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1001005067%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 100877811%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100744549%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100714545%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100654439%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100784652%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100664440%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectXDirectX 12 Ultimate12.0
Vulkan1.31.2
OpenGLUp to 4.64.6
UpscalingIntel XeSSNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0 / oneAPIOpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureXe2GCN 3.0Better
Process nodeTSMC N5Better28 nm
Release dateQ2'252015
Device classProfDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor countNot publicly specified8900 million
Die sizeNot publicly specified596 mm²
Shader units / cores20 Xe cores4096Better
Base clockNot publicly specified1000 MHz
Boost clockNot publicly specified1000 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCI Express 5.0 x8PCIe 3x16
LengthVaries by board manufacturer154 mm
ThicknessVaries by board manufacturerDual-slot
Recommended PSUNot publicly specified450 W
Power connectorVaries by board manufacturer8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.1; board dependentHDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortDisplayPort 2.1; board dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CVaries by board manufacturerNo
Max monitors44
Max resolution7680 x 4320@120Hz4096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM24 GB GDDR6Better4 GB HBM
Memory typeGDDR6HBM
Memory bus192 bit4096 bitBetter
TFLOPS12.28Better8.192
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 16
- Specifications
- 23 / 68
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Arc Pro B60 or R9 Nano?+
Arc Pro B60 has the higher overall gaming score, while R9 Nano offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Arc Pro B60 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
Arc Pro B60 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Arc Pro B60 offers more overall performance, while Arc Pro B60 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Arc Pro B60 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
R9 Nano is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Arc Pro B60 leads in combined 1440p performance. Arc Pro B60 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Arc Pro B60 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
R9 Nano is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
R9 Nano is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to Arc Pro B60 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.