AMD Radeon 890M vs Intel Arc G3 Extreme Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 890M enters the database with a full suite of recorded measurements, while the Intel Arc G3 Extreme arrives with no completed benchmark entries. This asymmetry defines the comparison: the 890M has ten benchmark results across DirectX, OpenCL, Vulkan, and compute workloads, whereas the Arc G3 Extreme has zero scores recorded in the database at this time.

The 890M shows its strongest relative performance in PassMark G3D with 8076 points, and its PassMark G2D result of 979 indicates solid 2D acceleration. Compute workloads show a score of 4157 in PassMark GPU Compute, while Geekbench Vulkan reaches 40808 and Geekbench OpenCL reaches 37254. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result sits at 590.

Without any recorded benchmarks for the Arc G3 Extreme, the database cannot assign it wins in any workload category. The win count stands at 0 for each side in the head-to-head table, reflecting the absence of paired measurements rather than a lack of capability.

The Arc G3 Extreme does hold a theoretical advantage in raw throughput figures. Its FP32 rating of 7.680 TFLOPS exceeds the 890M's 5.939 TFLOPS, and its FP16 rating of 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) more than doubles the 890M's 5.939 TFLOPS (1:1). These figures suggest the Intel part could outperform in shader-heavy and FP16-oriented tasks, but the database lacks the benchmark results to confirm such behavior.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Radeon 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme has an average benchmark score of 0 because no benchmark results are recorded for it.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The 890M sits at the 45th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Arc G3 Extreme sits at the 50th percentile, though this ranking is based on no recorded benchmark data.

Q: How does the 890M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 890M trails the AMD Radeon Vega 8 by 0.1%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 by 0.7%, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 by 0.9%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M by 1.0%.

Q: What is the FP16 compute ratio for each GPU?

A: The 890M has an FP16 rating of 5.939 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput matches FP32. The Arc G3 Extreme has an FP16 rating of 15.36 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput is twice its FP32 rate.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

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

Q: What is the pixel rate of each GPU?

A: The 890M delivers 92.80 GPixel/s, while the Arc G3 Extreme delivers 60.00 GPixel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no paired head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon 890M and the Intel Arc G3 Extreme. The head-to-head table is empty, and the win count for each side is 0. This means any direct comparison must rely on the separately recorded measurements for the 890M and the theoretical specifications for the Arc G3 Extreme.

For the 890M, the recorded scores provide a clear performance profile. PassMark DirectX 11 shows 73 points, the highest of its DirectX legacy tests, while DirectX 9 shows 97 points, DirectX 12 shows 37 points, and DirectX 10 shows 33 points. The PassMark G3D score of 8076 and G2D score of 979 indicate the GPU handles both 3D and 2D workloads without a severe imbalance. Geekbench Vulkan at 40808 outpaces Geekbench OpenCL at 37254 by roughly 9.5%, suggesting Vulkan is the more efficient API path for this hardware. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 590 is the lowest absolute number among the modern workloads, reflecting the demanding nature of that test.

The Arc G3 Extreme has no such measurements. Its theoretical pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s is lower than the 890M's 92.80 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s is lower than the 890M's 185.6 GTexel/s. These figures indicate the 890M holds an advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios. Conversely, the Arc G3 Extreme's FP32 throughput of 7.680 TFLOPS exceeds the 890M's 5.939 TFLOPS, pointing to a potential advantage in compute-heavy or shader-limited workloads. The FP16 gap is even larger: 15.36 TFLOPS versus 5.939 TFLOPS, a 2.6x difference in favor of the Intel part.

The TDP figures also differ substantially. The Arc G3 Extreme is rated at 80 W, while the 890M is rated at 15 W. This 65 W difference suggests the Intel part may have more sustained performance headroom, but it also implies higher power draw in mobile systems. Both are IGP-class parts with no power connectors, and both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification field. The 890M uses a 4 nm TSMC process node, while the Arc G3 Extreme uses a 3 nm Intel process node. The 890M integrates 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 145.9M per mm². The Arc G3 Extreme's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

Shading resources differ significantly. The 890M has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Arc G3 Extreme has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The Intel part has 50% more shading units, while the AMD part has 33% more TMUs and 33% more ROPs.

Ray tracing cores also differ: the 890M has 16 RT cores, while the Arc G3 Extreme has 12. Neither GPU lists tensor cores.

Clock speeds show the 890M with a base of 400 MHz and a boost of 2900 MHz, versus the Arc G3 Extreme's base of 300 MHz and boost of 2500 MHz. The 890M has both a higher base and a higher boost clock, with a 400 MHz advantage at boost.

The bus interface differs. The 890M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Arc G3 Extreme is listed simply as "IGP" with no specific bus width. Both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, and both have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

The TDP difference is notable: 15 W for the 890M versus 80 W for the Arc G3 Extreme. The 890M's slot width is listed as IGP, as is the Arc G3 Extreme's. Neither has power connectors, and neither has a suggested PSU rating.

Release dates also differ. The 890M was released on 2024-07-14, while the Arc G3 Extreme is dated 2026-05-31. The 890M lists its predecessor as Navi II IGP, while the Arc G3 Extreme has no predecessor listed.

Architecture Differences

The 890M is built on RDNA 3.5 architecture and belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. Its chip is Strix Point. The Arc G3 Extreme uses Xe3-LPG architecture and belongs to the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation, with a Panther Lake chip.

The manufacturing processes reflect different foundries and nodes. The 890M is fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process, while the Arc G3 Extreme is fabricated by Intel on a 3 nm process. The 890M's transistor count of 34,000 million is recorded, while the Arc G3 Extreme's is unknown.

The shading unit counts represent a key architectural difference. The Arc G3 Extreme's 1536 shading units versus the 890M's 1024 means the Intel architecture allocates more parallel execution lanes per shader array. However, the 890M counters with higher TMU and ROP counts, 64 and 32 respectively, versus 48 and 24 for the Intel part. This suggests the AMD design favors texture and pixel throughput, while the Intel design favors raw shader compute.

FP16 behavior differs at the architectural level. The 890M's FP16 rating of 5.939 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio indicates it executes FP16 at the same rate as FP32, with no dedicated fast path. The Arc G3 Extreme's FP16 rating of 15.36 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio indicates it executes FP16 at twice the FP32 rate, implying a hardware-accelerated FP16 path.

The RT core counts differ, with 16 on the 890M versus 12 on the Arc G3 Extreme. This could affect ray-traced workload performance in either direction, but no benchmark data exists to quantify the impact.

The boost clock difference of 2900 MHz versus 2500 MHz, combined with the TMU and ROP advantages, gives the 890M higher fill rates: 92.80 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s, and 185.6 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s. The Arc G3 Extreme's FP32 and FP16 advantages remain its primary architectural strengths.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear split between these two GPUs. The AMD Radeon 890M has a complete set of benchmark results in the database, an average score of 9210, and sits at the 45th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, the Radeon Vega 8, GeForce GTX 960, GeForce GTX 465, and GeForce GTX 850M, all fall within 1% of its average score, placing it in established mid-range integrated territory.

The Intel Arc G3 Extreme has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and a 50th percentile listing that reflects its unmeasured status. Its theoretical specifications suggest a different design philosophy: more shading units, higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, but lower TMU and ROP counts, lower clocks, and a higher 80 W TDP.

For workloads measured in the database, the 890M is the only part with verified performance. Its PassMark G3D score of 8076, Geekbench Vulkan score of 40808, and Geekbench OpenCL score of 37254 provide concrete reference points. The 890M's 15 W TDP also makes it suitable for power-constrained platforms, a factor supported by its 4 nm TSMC process and 233 mm² die size.

For workloads that rely on FP16 throughput or raw shader count, the Arc G3 Extreme's specifications indicate potential advantages. Its 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 figures exceed the 890M's 5.939 TFLOPS in both categories. However, without benchmark results, these advantages remain unverified in the database.

The selection depends on whether the user prioritizes measured performance or theoretical headroom. The 890M delivers verifiable results across DirectX, Vulkan, OpenCL, and compute workloads. The Arc G3 Extreme offers higher compute ceilings and a newer 3 nm Intel process, but its absence from the benchmark table leaves its real-world behavior undefined. The data favors the 890M for immediate, documented capability, while the Arc G3 Extreme remains an unproven quantity with promising specifications.