AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs Intel Arc Pro B390 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark results for the AMD Radeon PRO W7800, while the Intel Arc Pro B390 currently has no recorded benchmark scores. This makes a direct head-to-head comparison of measured performance impossible based on the available data. The AMD card's average benchmark score of 164,894 places it at the 97th percentile among all GPUs tracked by the database, while the Intel part sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero, indicating no completed test runs have been submitted.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800's recorded results show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 154,366 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 175,422. These figures establish a baseline for the card's compute capabilities under both API frameworks. The Vulkan score runs approximately 13.6% higher than the OpenCL result, which suggests the architecture responds favorably to Vulkan's lower overhead model, though both scores remain within the same performance tier.

For context on the AMD card's competitive position, the database lists four nearby rivals. The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation posts an average score of 166,094, which is 0.7% higher than the W7800's average. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 records 165,217, a 0.2% advantage. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X reaches 168,574, leading the W7800 by 2.2%. The only rival the W7800 beats is the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB, which scores 162,504, meaning the W7800 holds a 1.5% advantage. These deltas are all narrow, clustering within a 3.7 percentage point band across the four comparison points.

The absence of any benchmark entries for the Intel Arc Pro B390 means the database cannot provide a comparable performance figure. Its 50th percentile ranking is a default placement rather than a measured outcome. The Intel card's hardware specifications suggest it targets a fundamentally different segment, but no numerical verification exists in the recorded data.

The Verdict

The data available in the database points to two products with divergent positioning. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is a fully benchmarked discrete workstation card with an average score of 164,894 and a 97th percentile ranking. It sits within 2.2% of three nearby rivals and ahead of one by 1.5%, placing it in a competitive mid-to-high tier for professional compute workloads.

The Intel Arc Pro B390, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores. Its 50th percentile ranking is unverified, and its specifications describe a fundamentally different product category. The Intel part uses an integrated graphics processor (IGP) slot width, requires no power connectors, draws 80 W, and relies on system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. The AMD card is a dual-slot, 260 W discrete solution with 32 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory and 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

From the recorded data alone, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the only one of the two with demonstrated performance. It delivers 45.25 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 90.50 TFLOPS of FP16 compute, figures that are fully documented. The Intel Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 are stated specifications, but no benchmark confirms how those theoretical numbers translate into real workloads.

Professionals seeking a discrete workstation accelerator with measurable performance and a strong percentile standing should look to the AMD card. The Intel part appears oriented toward integrated mobile or compact systems where power draw is minimal and dedicated memory is absent. The database provides no evidence that the Intel card can compete on compute throughput, and there is no benchmark data to suggest otherwise.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The W7800's average score of 164,894 is 0.2% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 (165,217), 0.7% behind the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166,094), and 2.2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X (168,574). It leads the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (162,504) by 1.5%.

Q: What benchmark scores are recorded for the Intel Arc Pro B390?

A: The database lists no benchmark entries for the Intel Arc Pro B390. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero, and its percentile ranking of 50th is not supported by any measured test results.

Q: What are the FP32 and FP16 compute figures for both cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 delivers 45.25 TFLOPS FP32 and 90.50 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: What is the power draw for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has a TDP of 260 W and requires two 8-pin power connectors with a suggested 600 W PSU. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has a TDP of 80 W and requires no power connectors; no suggested PSU is listed.

Q: What is the release date for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 was released on April 12, 2023. The Intel Arc Pro B390 is dated January 26, 2026.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and Intel Arc Pro B390 differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD card uses the Navi 31 chip built on TSMC's 5 nm process, containing 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die with a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The Intel part uses the Panther Lake chip on Intel's 3 nm process, with transistor count, die size, and transistor density all listed as unknown.

Clock speeds show a notable contrast. The AMD card has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost clock of 2525 MHz, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Intel card has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, with system-shared memory.

Memory specifications are entirely different. The AMD card provides 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card relies on system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory bus width.

Compute resources differ substantially. The AMD card contains 4480 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 128 raster operation units, and 70 ray tracing cores. The Intel card contains 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. Neither card lists tensor cores.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The AMD card achieves 323.2 GPixel/s and 707.0 GTexel/s. The Intel card achieves 60.00 GPixel/s and 120.0 GTexel/s.

Physical and power characteristics diverge completely. The AMD card is dual-slot, 280 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, requiring 260 W and two 8-pin connectors with a 600 W suggested PSU. The Intel card is an IGP with no listed dimensions, no power connectors, an 80 W TDP, and no suggested PSU. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Intel card uses an IGP bus interface.

Display outputs differ: the AMD card provides three DisplayPort 2.1 ports and one mini-DisplayPort 2.1, while the Intel card's outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD. The Intel card has no launch MSRP recorded. The AMD card's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, while the Intel card's predecessor is the HD Graphics-WM. Both cards are listed as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename Plum Bonito, belonging to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture with the chip name Panther Lake, belonging to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation.

The process nodes differ: AMD uses TSMC's 5 nm process, while Intel uses its own 3 nm process. The foundries are correspondingly different, with AMD relying on TSMC and Intel on its internal fabrication.

The transistor counts present a sharp contrast. The AMD card integrates 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a density of 109.1M transistors per mm². The Intel card's transistor count and die size are both unknown, and no density figure is recorded.

Shader architecture differs significantly. The AMD card's RDNA 3.0 design employs 4480 shading units, 280 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 70 RT cores. The Intel Xe3-LPG design uses 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. The AMD card has roughly 2.9 times the shading units, 5.8 times the TMUs, 5.3 times the ROPs, and 5.8 times the RT cores compared to the Intel part.

Memory architecture is a fundamental differentiator. The AMD card features dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and fixed 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel card uses system-shared memory, meaning the bandwidth is system dependent rather than fixed. This reflects the Intel part's integrated nature versus the AMD card's discrete design.

API support is identical on paper. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The clock behavior also shows architectural divergence. The AMD card runs at a high base clock of 1895 MHz and boosts to 2525 MHz. The Intel card has an unusually low base clock of 300 MHz but boosts to 2500 MHz, suggesting a power-conscious design that ramps up under load. The AMD card's memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate, while the Intel card's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Both cards have null tensor core counts, meaning neither architecture emphasizes dedicated tensor hardware in the recorded specifications. The ray tracing implementations differ in scale, with the AMD card carrying 70 RT cores versus the Intel card's 12.

The integrated nature of the Intel part is further confirmed by its slot width of IGP, no power connectors, and 80 W TDP. The AMD card's dual-slot discrete design with 260 W TDP and two 8-pin connectors reflects a workstation-class power envelope. The Intel card's 3 nm process and Panther Lake chip suggest a modern, efficient design aimed at portable or embedded contexts, while the AMD card's 5 nm process and Navi 31 chip target dedicated professional workloads.