Intel Arc 130T Mobile vs Intel Arc Pro B390 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Arc Pro B390 is the stronger mobile GPU for compute-heavy and higher-resolution workloads, while the Intel Arc 130T Mobile is the power-efficient choice for thin-and-light systems. The recorded data shows the Arc Pro B390 delivers roughly 1.95 times the FP32 throughput of the Arc 130T Mobile (7.680 TFLOPS versus 3.942 TFLOPS) and doubles FP16 performance (15.36 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS). It also boosts 300 MHz higher (2500 MHz versus 2200 MHz) and adds 640 more shading units (1536 versus 896) plus 5 additional ray tracing cores (12 versus 7). However, the Arc Pro B390 consumes more than double the power (80 W versus 35 W), making the Arc 130T Mobile the clear pick for battery-sensitive designs where the lower thermal envelope is non-negotiable.

Benchmark results indicate the Arc Pro B390 is the choice for professional rendering, AI inference, and any workload that scales with raw shader throughput. Its advantage in FP32 and FP16 rates is substantial, and the higher boost clock supports sustained performance under load. The Arc 130T Mobile, by contrast, is suited to everyday graphics, light content creation, and portable devices where a 35 W TDP allows for thinner chassis and longer battery life. The database positions both GPUs at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, but the performance gap between them is decisive: the Arc Pro B390 leads in every compute metric except pixel and texture rates, where the Arc 130T Mobile holds a narrow edge.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different Intel nodes and microarchitectures. The Intel Arc 130T Mobile uses the Arrow Lake-H chip with the Xe-LPG+ architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. This node difference contributes to the Arc Pro B390’s higher transistor density potential, though the database lists transistor counts and die sizes as unknown for both.

The shading unit count differs significantly: the Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units versus 896 on the Arc 130T Mobile, a 71.4% increase. Texture mapping units differ in the opposite direction: the Arc 130T Mobile has 56 TMUs versus 48 on the Arc Pro B390. Render output units also favor the Arc 130T Mobile (28 versus 24). Ray tracing cores are more numerous on the Arc Pro B390 (12 versus 7), suggesting stronger ray-traced lighting performance. Neither GPU lists tensor cores in the database.

Both GPUs share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, and both have a base clock of 300 MHz. The boost clock differs by 300 MHz (2500 MHz versus 2200 MHz). The Arc Pro B390 is rated for 80 W TDP with no power connectors, while the Arc 130T Mobile is rated for 35 W and also uses an integrated graphics processor (IGP) slot width. Both are listed as Active in production, with the Arc 130T Mobile released in January 2025 and the Arc Pro B390 in January 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS FP32, which is 1.95 times the 3.942 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc 130T Mobile.

Q: How do the ray tracing cores compare?

A: The Arc Pro B390 has 12 ray tracing cores, while the Arc 130T Mobile has 7, a difference of 5 cores in favor of the Arc Pro B390.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Arc Pro B390 is rated at 80 W TDP, while the Arc 130T Mobile is rated at 35 W TDP, making the Arc 130T Mobile more than twice as power-efficient in terms of thermal design.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

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

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Arc Pro B390 boosts to 2500 MHz, which is 300 MHz higher than the Arc 130T Mobile’s 2200 MHz boost.

Q: Are both GPUs integrated or discrete?

A: Both are IGP (integrated graphics processor) parts with system-shared memory, and both use a portable device dependent display output.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the recorded data:

| Specification | Intel Arc 130T Mobile | Intel Arc Pro B390 |

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

| Chip | Arrow Lake-H | Panther Lake |

| Architecture | Xe-LPG+ | Xe3-LPG |

| Generation | Arc Graphics-M (Arrow Lake) | Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) |

| Process Node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2500 MHz |

| Shading Units | 896 | 1536 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 56 | 48 |

| Render Output Units | 28 | 24 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 7 | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 61.60 GPixel/s | 60.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 120.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.942 TFLOPS | 7.680 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) | 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 35 W | 80 W |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-01-26 |

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-M | HD Graphics-WM |

All other fields are identical: base clock (300 MHz), memory (System Shared, System Dependent bandwidth), bus interface (IGP), display outputs (Portable Device Dependent), DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan versions, production status (Active), and the absence of a launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and neither lists individual benchmark scores or nearest rivals. The comparison below is derived entirely from the specification-level performance metrics in the recorded data.

The largest win for the Intel Arc Pro B390 is in FP32 throughput. Its 7.680 TFLOPS is 3.738 TFLOPS higher than the Arc 130T Mobile’s 3.942 TFLOPS, a 94.8% advantage. FP16 performance follows the same pattern: 15.36 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS, a 7.475 TFLOPS gap that amounts to a 94.8% improvement. These compute metrics indicate that the Arc Pro B390 can process roughly twice as many floating-point operations per second, which directly benefits shader-heavy workloads, compute shaders, and machine learning inference.

The Arc Pro B390 also wins on shading unit count (1536 versus 896, a 640-unit lead), ray tracing cores (12 versus 7, a 5-core lead), and boost clock (2500 MHz versus 2200 MHz, a 300 MHz lead). The higher boost clock suggests better peak frequency headroom, though the database does not provide sustained clock behavior.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile wins on three metrics. Its pixel rate is 61.60 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s, a 1.60 GPixel/s advantage that reflects the higher ROP count (28 versus 24). Its texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, a 3.2 GTexel/s lead that comes from having 56 TMUs versus 48. These wins are modest in percentage terms (2.7% for pixel rate, 2.7% for texture rate) compared to the compute gap, but they indicate the Arc 130T Mobile can maintain slightly higher fill rates for certain rasterization tasks.

The TDP difference is stark: 80 W versus 35 W. The Arc Pro B390 consumes 45 W more, which is a 128.6% increase. This thermal cost is the trade-off for the compute advantage, and it directly affects system design choices.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins in compute-bound scenarios. Its FP32 and FP16 rates are nearly double those of the Arc 130T Mobile, so any workload that relies on shader arithmetic, such as 3D rendering, scientific simulation, or GPU-accelerated encoding, will see a significant performance benefit. The extra 640 shading units and 5 ray tracing cores also support more complex geometry and lighting calculations. The higher boost clock (2500 MHz) suggests better peak performance under burst workloads. For professional applications that can use ray tracing, the 12 RT cores give the Arc Pro B390 a clear advantage. The 80 W TDP, while higher, is the price for this capability, and the database shows it has no power connectors, indicating it is designed for systems that supply power through the motherboard.

The Intel Arc 130T Mobile wins in power-constrained environments. Its 35 W TDP is less than half of the Arc Pro B390’s, making it suitable for ultra-portable laptops and fanless designs where thermal dissipation is limited. The slightly higher pixel rate (61.60 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (123.2 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s) give it a marginal edge in basic 2D composition and light 3D scenes that are fill-rate bound rather than shader bound. The higher ROP count (28 versus 24) supports more efficient output to displays, which matters for everyday desktop use. The 5 nm TSMC process, while larger than Intel’s 3 nm node, still enables a competitive power profile for a 35 W part.

The release timeline also matters. The Arc 130T Mobile launched in January 2025, while the Arc Pro B390 followed in January 2026. This year gap means the Arc Pro B390 benefits from a newer architecture generation (Xe3-LPG versus Xe-LPG+) and a smaller process node, which likely contributes to its higher performance per shading unit. However, the database does not provide efficiency metrics per watt, so the exact trade-off between the 45 W TDP increase and the compute gain cannot be quantified beyond the raw figures.

For users who prioritize battery life, thin chassis, and light workloads, the Arc 130T Mobile is the data-supported choice. For users who need maximum compute throughput, ray tracing capability, and are willing to accept a 80 W TDP in a larger portable workstation, the Arc Pro B390 is the clear winner. Both GPUs share the same API feature set, so software compatibility is not a differentiator. The decision reduces to performance versus power, and the recorded data shows the Arc Pro B390 offers roughly double the compute for more than double the power draw.