llamaperf

Intel Arc Pro B70 vs M5 Ultra 96GB for local LLMs

14 reports on the Intel Arc Pro B70 and 3 on the M5 Ultra 96GB

Which is faster for local LLMs?

On Qwen3.8 27B at 8-bit, the Intel Arc Pro B70 runs at 16.7 tokens per second (one run) and the M5 Ultra 96GB at 15.0 (one run). Those are community reports whose engines and settings differ, so the gap is a rough sign, not a controlled measure of the two cards. Memory bandwidth, which caps how fast a card can write, is 2.0x higher on the M5 Ultra 96GB (608 GB/s on the Intel Arc Pro B70, 1,229 on the M5 Ultra 96GB).

Intel Arc Pro B70
Memory
32GB
Memory bandwidth
608 GB/s
FP16 compute
183.5 TFLOPS
Reports
14
M5 Ultra 96GB
Memory
96GB unified
Memory bandwidth
1,229 GB/s
FP16 compute
not on record
Reports
3

Measured on both

Median tokens per second from plain runs (one device, one request, no speculative decoding, the whole model in the device's memory) of the same model size at the same quant level. Engines and context lengths can still differ between the runs. How to read these

ModelIntel Arc Pro B70M5 Ultra 96GB
Qwen3.8 27B8-bit16.7one run15.0one run

Estimated by the calculator

The quant the calculator recommends for each card and its estimated speed at a 32,768-token context with 32 GB of system RAM, from memory bandwidth and the model's shape. Where a model was also measured above, the measurement wins.

ModelIntel Arc Pro B70M5 Ultra 96GB
Qwen3.8 27B15.2 t/sQ6_K14.9 t/sFP16
Qwen3.8 125B · 6B active18.6 t/sQ2_K, experts in RAM103.1 t/sQ3_K_M
DeepSeek V4 Flash 284B · 13B activedoesn't fit at these settingsdoesn't fit at these settings
Qwen3.6 35B · 3B active55.3 t/sQ5_K_M107.0 t/sQ8_0
Qwen3.6 27B15.2 t/sQ6_K14.9 t/sFP16
Gemma 4 26B · 4B active38.8 t/sQ6_K35.5 t/sFP16
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 552B · 16B activedoesn't fit at these settingsdoesn't fit at these settings

Change the context, RAM or model in the calculator: Intel Arc Pro B70 · M5 Ultra 96GB

Every report on each card, with its source: Intel Arc Pro B70 · M5 Ultra 96GB

More comparisons