AMD Radeon 840M vs Intel Arc B390 Comparison

The Verdict

The data in the database presents an unusual comparison: the AMD Radeon 840M has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Intel Arc B390 has a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 1482. The Intel part sits at the 9th percentile of all GPUs, placing it among very low-performing hardware. Its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% behind), GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% behind), GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% behind), and GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% behind). The Arc B390 leads this group by a narrow margin, but that margin is small: just 1.3% over the closest competitor.

For the AMD Radeon 840M, the absence of benchmark entries means the database cannot confirm its performance position. The recorded data shows no wins for either part in head-to-head testing. Buyers should understand that the 840M is an unmeasured product in this database, while the Arc B390 has a verified but modest score. The Arc B390 is demonstrably a low-end part, and the AMD product remains unquantified. Users requiring verified performance data should rely on the Intel part's single result, while those considering the AMD product should treat its capabilities as unconfirmed by the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B390 wins the only measurable category: it has a benchmark score, a percentile ranking, and rival comparisons. The AMD Radeon 840M wins no recorded benchmark categories because no scores exist for it. In terms of raw specifications, the Intel part leads in several theoretical throughput metrics: its FP32 compute is 7.680 TFLOPS compared to 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1.4848 TFLOPS) for the AMD part, a roughly 5.2x advantage. The Arc B390 also has higher pixel rate (60.00 GPixel/s vs 23.20 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (120.0 GTexel/s vs 46.40 GTexel/s), and more shading units (1536 vs 256), TMUs (48 vs 16), ROPs (24 vs 8), and ray tracing cores (12 vs 4).

The AMD part wins on clock speed: its boost clock is 2900 MHz versus 2500 MHz for Intel, and its base clock is 400 MHz versus 300 MHz. The AMD Radeon 840M also has a lower TDP at 15 W versus 80 W for the Intel Arc B390, and uses PCIe 4.0 x8 rather than an IGP bus interface. The AMD chip is built on a 4 nm TSMC process, while Intel uses a 3 nm process from its own foundry. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP, so no price-based differentiation exists in the data.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point chip, belonging to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The Intel Arc B390 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip, part of the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation. Process nodes differ: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, while Intel uses 3 nm from Intel's own foundry. Transistor counts and die sizes are unknown for both.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD part has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The 6x difference in shading units and 3x differences in TMUs and ROPs explain the large gap in theoretical fill rates. FP16 compute also differs: AMD delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while Intel delivers 15.36 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning Intel's FP16 throughput is twice its FP32 throughput while AMD's is equal.

Both parts use system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, so memory configuration is not a differentiator. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are integrated graphics processors with no power connectors, and both list display outputs as portable device dependent. The AMD part uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Intel part is listed simply as IGP. Power draw differs: AMD is rated at 15 W, Intel at 80 W, a substantial gap for integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark score in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. The AMD Radeon 840M has no recorded benchmarks, so no comparative score exists.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It leads the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX by 1.3%, the GeForce 800M by 1.5%, the GeForce GT 625 OEM by 2.5%, and the GeForce GT 710 by 2.7%. Its percentile ranking is 9th among all GPUs.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, while the AMD Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, a 6x difference.

Q: What are the power requirements of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Arc B390 has a TDP of 80 W. Neither uses external power connectors.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What process nodes do these GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Arc B390 uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Radeon 840M and Intel Arc B390. The only benchmark data available is the Arc B390's single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. The AMD part's average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile is 50, which reflects a default or unmeasured position rather than a verified result. The Arc B390's percentile of 9 places it among the lowest-performing GPUs in the database. Its closest competitor, the GeForce GT 520MX, trails by only 1.3% (1463 vs 1482), indicating that the Arc B390's performance lead over its immediate rivals is minimal. The gap to the fourth nearest rival, the GeForce GT 710, is 2.7% (1443 vs 1482), still a narrow margin.

The theoretical compute data tells a clearer story. Intel's FP32 throughput of 7.680 TFLOPS is approximately 5.17x higher than AMD's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Pixel rate favors Intel at 60.00 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, a 2.59x advantage. Texture rate favors Intel at 120.0 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, a 2.59x advantage. Ray tracing core count favors Intel at 12 versus 4, a 3x advantage. These specification gaps are consistent with the Intel part's higher TDP of 80 W versus 15 W for AMD. The only metrics where AMD leads are clock speeds: 400 MHz base versus 300 MHz, and 2900 MHz boost versus 2500 MHz. The AMD part's higher clocks do not compensate for its much smaller execution resource pool in theoretical throughput.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two parts differ:

| Specification | AMD Radeon 840M | Intel Arc B390 |

|---|---|---|

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Chip | Krackan Point | Panther Lake |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Xe3-LPG |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz | 2500 MHz |

| Shading Units | 256 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 16 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.20 GPixel/s | 60.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.40 GTexel/s | 120.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 1,484.8 GFLOPS | 7.680 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 80 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | IGP |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2026-01-26 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | None |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 9 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 0 | 1482 |

Both parts share identical memory configurations (system shared, system dependent bandwidth), identical API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), identical slot width (IGP), no power connectors, and portable device dependent display outputs. Transistor counts and die sizes are unknown for both, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded. The AMD part released earlier (2025-02-28) than the Intel part (2026-01-26), and AMD lists a predecessor (Navi II IGP) while Intel does not. The production status for both is Active.