Intel Arc B390 vs Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the Intel Arc B390 as a significantly more capable integrated graphics solution than the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile. The Arc B390, based on the 3 nm Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, delivers a 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. This places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rivals being discrete entry-level cards like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% behind).

The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile, built on the 10 nm Raptor Lake chip with Generation 12.2 architecture, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its percentile ranking of 50 reflects an average position among all GPUs, but without a measured score, direct numerical comparison is impossible. The data indicates the Arc B390 is the choice for users who need measurable 3D performance in a portable device, while the Iris Xe remains an older, lower-specification option whose performance profile is not quantified in the current database.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc B390 wins in every measurable category where data exists. It achieves 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus 1.856 TFLOPS for the Iris Xe, a factor of roughly 4.14x. Its texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s more than doubles the Iris Xe's 58.00 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s exceeds the Iris Xe's 29.00 GPixel/s by a similar margin.

The Iris Xe's only advantage lies in its power envelope. At 15 W TDP, it draws substantially less power than the Arc B390's 80 W TDP. This makes the Iris Xe suitable for thin-and-light portable devices where thermal and battery constraints are primary. The Arc B390, with its higher power budget, targets devices that can accommodate greater thermal output in exchange for significantly higher graphics throughput.

The Arc B390 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Iris Xe is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). This means the Arc B390 exposes features from the higher-tier DX12 feature level, which matters for modern game titles that require 12_2 capabilities. The Iris Xe cannot claim this support level.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Arc B390 uses Xe3-LPG, the third-generation Xe architecture, implemented on Intel's 3 nm process. The Iris Xe uses Generation 12.2, implemented on Intel's 10 nm process. The process node difference alone explains a substantial portion of the performance gap, as the 3 nm node allows for tighter transistor packing and higher clock speeds at comparable power.

The Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The Iris Xe has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. The Arc B390 also includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Iris Xe. This gives the Arc B390 dedicated hardware for ray-traced workloads, which the Iris Xe cannot accelerate.

Clock speeds differ markedly. The Arc B390 boosts to 2500 MHz, while the Iris Xe boosts to 1450 MHz. Both share a 300 MHz base clock. The Arc B390's higher boost clock, combined with its larger execution resource pool, drives its commanding lead in raw throughput metrics.

Both GPUs use system-shared memory, meaning they rely on the host system's RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. Memory bandwidth is system-dependent for both, so the actual performance in memory-bound scenarios will vary with the platform's memory configuration. Neither GPU has a dedicated memory bus width or memory type listed; both are marked as system shared.

The Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The Iris Xe supports DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The API gap is solely in the DirectX feature level. Both use a ring bus interface, though the Arc B390 is classified as an IGP while the Iris Xe is also an IGP with a ring bus connection.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Arc B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), compared to the Iris Xe's 1.856 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.712 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Arc B390 is approximately 4.14x faster in FP32.

Q: Does either GPU support ray tracing?

A: The Arc B390 includes 12 ray tracing cores. The Iris Xe has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What DirectX versions do they support?

A: The Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Iris Xe supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

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

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12. It leads the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX by 1.3%, the NVIDIA GeForce 800M by 1.5%, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM by 2.5%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 by 2.7%.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Arc B390 has an 80 W TDP. The Iris Xe has a 15 W TDP. The Arc B390 uses no external power connectors (it is an IGP), and the Iris Xe's power connector status is not listed.

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The Arc B390 has a release date of 2026-01-26. The Iris Xe has a release date of 2023-01-03. The Iris Xe's successor is listed as Arc Graphics-M, which aligns with the Arc B390's generation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark entries exist in the database for these two GPUs. The Arc B390 has a single recorded benchmark: 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 1482. The Iris Xe has no recorded benchmark scores at all, and its average benchmark score is 0.

The Arc B390's 1482 score places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. This percentile ranking indicates that 91% of all recorded GPUs score higher, which may seem low, but the comparison set includes discrete desktop and mobile graphics cards. Within its immediate rival group, the Arc B390 leads the four closest competitors by margins of 1.3% to 2.7%. These rivals are all NVIDIA discrete entry-level parts, which suggests the Arc B390's integrated design achieves performance on par with older low-end discrete solutions.

The Iris Xe's 50th percentile ranking, without a corresponding score, cannot be interpreted in absolute terms. A 50th percentile position means it sits at the median of all recorded GPUs, but the absence of a benchmark score prevents any quantitative comparison. The database records no wins for either GPU in head-to-head testing, as no such tests exist.

In the absence of direct benchmark competition, the specification data provides the only basis for comparison. The Arc B390's FP32 throughput of 7.680 TFLOPS is 4.14x the Iris Xe's 1.856 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s is 2.07x the Iris Xe's 58.00 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s is 2.07x the Iris Xe's 29.00 GPixel/s. These ratios are consistent across the board, indicating a uniform architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific one.

The Arc B390's 1536 shading units represent a 2.4x increase over the Iris Xe's 640. Its 48 TMUs versus 40 TMUs and 24 ROPs versus 20 ROPs show smaller, but still positive, gains in those specific units. The boost clock difference, 2500 MHz versus 1450 MHz, contributes a 1.72x frequency advantage. When combined with the larger execution resources, the cumulative effect explains the substantial throughput gap.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: Panther Lake (Arc B390) versus Raptor Lake (Iris Xe)
• Architecture: Xe3-LPG versus Generation 12.2
• Generation: Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) versus HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake)
• Process Node: 3 nm versus 10 nm
• Boost Clock: 2500 MHz versus 1450 MHz
• Shading Units: 1536 versus 640
• TMUs: 48 versus 40
• ROPs: 24 versus 20
• Ray Tracing Cores: 12 versus none
• Pixel Rate: 60.00 GPixel/s versus 29.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 120.0 GTexel/s versus 58.00 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 1.856 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 3.712 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 80 W versus 15 W
• Bus Interface: IGP versus Ring Bus
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Release Date: 2026-01-26 versus 2023-01-03
• Successor: none versus Arc Graphics-M

Both GPUs share identical memory characteristics: system-shared size, type, bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth. Both have a 300 MHz base clock. Both use portable device dependent display outputs. Both list no power connectors, though the Iris Xe's field is null rather than explicitly "None". Neither has a launch MSRP recorded. The Arc B390 has a production status of Active, as does the Iris Xe.