AMD Radeon 8050S vs Intel Arc Pro B390 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8050S and Intel Arc Pro B390 occupy different positions in the mobile graphics landscape, and the recorded data shows a clear split in where each part can claim an advantage. The AMD Radeon 8050S is the only one of the two with completed benchmark results in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 65818 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 58398 give it an average benchmark score of 62108, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The Intel Arc Pro B390, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile, which reflects its status as a part with no measured performance data yet.

For compute workloads that stress raw shading throughput, the AMD Radeon 8050S has the architectural edge. It delivers 11.47 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, whereas the Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS. That is a substantial gap in single-precision compute. However, the Intel part shifts the balance in FP16 workloads, where its 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) exceeds the AMD part's 11.47 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Applications that can use packed half-precision math may favor the Intel architecture, even though the AMD part holds the overall compute lead in general-purpose scenarios.

The AMD Radeon 8050S also wins on memory-system throughput in terms of raw pixel and texture processing. Its pixel rate of 179.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 358.4 GTexel/s dwarf the Intel Arc Pro B390's 60.00 GPixel/s and 120.0 GTexel/s. For rasterization-heavy scenes, the AMD part has nearly three times the pixel throughput, which directly impacts fill-rate-bound workloads. Both parts use system shared memory, so actual bandwidth is system dependent, but the internal processing rates tell a clear story.

Power consumption is another differentiator. The AMD Radeon 8050S has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel Arc Pro B390 is rated at 80 W. The AMD part achieves its higher FP32 throughput and higher pixel/texture rates while drawing less power, indicating better efficiency for those specific metrics. The Intel part's higher TDP does not translate into higher measured performance in the database, since no benchmark results exist for it.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 does hold advantages in process technology and half-precision compute. It is built on Intel's 3 nm node, versus TSMC's 4 nm node for the AMD part. That newer node likely contributes to the Intel part's FP16 capability, but without benchmark data, the practical impact remains unquantified. The AMD Radeon 8050S also uses a larger die at 308 mm², while the Intel die size is unknown.

The Verdict

The database contains measured results for only one of these two GPUs. The AMD Radeon 8050S has an average benchmark score of 62108, placing it at the 89th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all AMD parts: the Radeon Pro W6600M at 61896 (0.3% behind), the Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 63693 (2.5% ahead), the Radeon RX 7600M at 63775 (2.6% ahead), and the Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63830 (2.7% ahead). This places the Radeon 8050S in a tight cluster where it is essentially on par with its immediate competition, trailing the top of that group by less than 3%.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 has no recorded benchmark performance, so the database cannot confirm any performance claim for that part. Its 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder based on the absence of data, not a measured result. Any comparison between the two parts must therefore lean on the AMD side's verified scores and the architectural specifications listed for both.

For users who need verified compute performance today, the AMD Radeon 8050S is the only part in this comparison with recorded results. Its OpenCL score of 65818 and Vulkan score of 58398 demonstrate a capable integrated GPU that competes within a few percentage points of several established AMD mobile parts. The Intel Arc Pro B390, with no scores in the database, cannot be positioned relative to the AMD part or any other GPU based on measurements.

For FP16-heavy workloads, the Intel Arc Pro B390's 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) specification suggests an advantage on paper, but no benchmark confirms it. The AMD part's 11.47 TFLOPS (1:1) FP16 figure is lower, yet it is backed by actual Geekbench results. The verdict from the data is straightforward: the AMD Radeon 8050S is the measured performer, while the Intel Arc Pro B390 remains an unverified entry whose architectural specs indicate potential in specific compute niches but whose real-world standing is unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table between these two parts is empty, so no direct comparison scores exist in the database. Instead, the available data consists of each part's individual specifications and the AMD part's standalone benchmark results.

The largest verified win for the AMD Radeon 8050S is in pixel throughput. Its 179.2 GPixel/s is exactly 2.99 times the Intel Arc Pro B390's 60.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 358.4 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, a 2.99x advantage. These figures indicate that for any workload limited by rasterization output, the AMD part processes frames substantially faster.

FP32 compute favors AMD by a factor of 1.49: 11.47 TFLOPS versus 7.680 TFLOPS. This matters for general compute, physics simulation, and many rendering paths that rely on single-precision math. The AMD part also has more shading units (2048 versus 1536), more texture mapping units (128 versus 48), more raster operation units (64 versus 24), and more ray tracing cores (32 versus 12). Each of those counts reinforces the AMD part's fill-rate and compute advantage.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins the FP16 comparison by a margin of 1.34: 15.36 TFLOPS versus 11.47 TFLOPS. The Intel part achieves this through a 2:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it processes half-precision data at twice the rate of FP32. The AMD part uses a 1:1 ratio, so its FP16 throughput equals its FP32 throughput. For AI inference, certain image processing filters, and mixed-precision workloads that tolerate FP16, the Intel architecture has a theoretical edge.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD Radeon 8050S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Despite the Intel part's lower clocks, its newer 3 nm process node and different architecture allow it to post a higher FP16 figure. The AMD part's higher boost clock (2800 MHz versus 2500 MHz) contributes to its FP32 and fill-rate wins.

Power efficiency favors AMD in the measured metrics. The Radeon 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS FP32 at 55 W, while the Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 at 80 W. The AMD part produces 49% more FP32 throughput while consuming 31% less power. In FP16, the Intel part produces 34% more throughput while consuming 45% more power, which still leaves AMD ahead on FP16-per-watt despite Intel's higher absolute FP16 figure.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S has an average benchmark score of 62108. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no benchmark results are recorded for it.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 8050S compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon 8050S is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896) and 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63693). It also trails the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63775) by 2.6% and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63830) by 2.7%.

Q: Which GPU has better FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS FP32, which is 49% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU has better FP16 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), which is 34% higher than the AMD Radeon 8050S's 11.47 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio).

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S has a TDP of 55 W. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has a TDP of 80 W.

Q: Do both GPUs use dedicated memory?

A: No. Both the AMD Radeon 8050S and the Intel Arc Pro B390 use system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon 8050S uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Strix Halo chip, part of the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip, part of the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation.

Process nodes differ significantly. The AMD part is manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm node, while the Intel part uses Intel's 3 nm node. The AMD die measures 308 mm², while the Intel die size is unknown. Both parts have unknown transistor counts.

Core counts show a clear AMD advantage in most categories. The Radeon 8050S has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, and 32 ray tracing cores. The Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster operation units, and 12 ray tracing cores. Neither part lists tensor cores.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD Radeon 8050S runs at a base clock of 1295 MHz and boosts to 2800 MHz. The Intel Arc Pro B390 runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 2500 MHz. The AMD part's higher clocks contribute to its fill-rate and FP32 advantages.

Both parts are integrated GPUs (IGP) with no power connectors and no dedicated memory. Memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as system shared for both. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The AMD Radeon 8050S uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel Arc Pro B390's bus interface is listed simply as IGP. The AMD part's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-WM. The AMD part was released on 2025-01-05, and the Intel part was released on 2026-01-26. Both are currently marked as active production parts, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.