Intel Arc B390 vs Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to the Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile in raw processing power?

A: The Arc B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is roughly 9.4 times higher than the UHD 770 Mobile's 819.2 GFLOPS. The texture rate is also 120.0 GTexel/s versus 25.60 GTexel/s, a 4.7x difference.

Q: What is the architectural generation gap between these two iGPUs?

A: The Arc B390 is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture (Panther Lake chip, 3 nm process) from the Arc Graphics-M generation. The UHD 770 Mobile uses Generation 12.2 (Raptor Lake chip, 10 nm process) from the HD Graphics-M generation.

Q: Do both support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the UHD 770 Mobile is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Arc B390 has a TDP of 80 W, while the UHD 770 Mobile is rated at 15 W, a 65 W difference. This reflects the Arc B390's significantly higher compute resources.

Q: Which GPU has higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The UHD 770 Mobile holds a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile. However, the UHD 770 Mobile's average benchmark score is recorded as 0, whereas the Arc B390's average score is 1482 from its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test.

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

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482, which is 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% ahead of the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% ahead of the GeForce GT 710 (1443).

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc B390 and Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile come from entirely different design philosophies and process nodes. The Arc B390 is built on Intel's 3 nm process under the Xe3-LPG architecture, codenamed Panther Lake. The UHD 770 Mobile uses the older 10 nm process with Generation 12.2 architecture, based on the Raptor Lake chip. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP), but the Arc B390 belongs to the newer Arc Graphics-M generation, while the UHD 770 Mobile is part of the HD Graphics-M lineup.

The execution resources differ massively. The Arc B390 carries 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), 24 raster output units (ROPs), and 12 ray tracing cores. The UHD 770 Mobile has only 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores at all. That means the Arc B390 has 6 times more shading units, 3 times more TMUs, and 3 times more ROPs. The presence of dedicated ray tracing hardware in the Arc B390 is a fundamental architectural advantage, since the UHD 770 Mobile lacks any RT capability.

Clock speeds also diverge. Both have a 300 MHz base clock, but the Arc B390 boosts to 2500 MHz while the UHD 770 Mobile only reaches 1600 MHz. This 900 MHz boost advantage, combined with the larger shader array, explains the large throughput gap. The pixel rate for the Arc B390 is 60.00 GPixel/s against 12.80 GPixel/s for the UHD 770 Mobile. Texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s versus 25.60 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is identical in concept: both use system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The bus interface differs though, the Arc B390 uses IGP while the UHD 770 Mobile uses Ring Bus. Both display outputs are portable device dependent, which is typical for integrated solutions. The Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the UHD 770 Mobile only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Power consumption reflects the performance gap. The Arc B390 is rated at 80 W TDP, while the UHD 770 Mobile draws only 15 W. The Arc B390 has no power connectors, consistent with its IGP slot width. The UHD 770 Mobile's TDP is typical for a low-power integrated solution in a mobile chip.

The release dates show a clear generational separation. The UHD 770 Mobile was released on 2023-01-03, and its successor is listed as Arc Graphics-M. The Arc B390 was released on 2026-01-26, and both are currently marked as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data shows two GPUs serving entirely different performance tiers. The Arc B390 is a high-throughput integrated part with 1536 shading units, 12 ray tracing cores, and 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The UHD 770 Mobile is a modest integrated solution with 256 shading units and 819.2 GFLOPS, designed for basic graphics output rather than demanding workloads.

For users needing DirectX 12 Ultimate features, ray tracing hardware, or high fill rates, the Arc B390 is the clear choice based on every measurable specification in the database. Its 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate indicate it can handle significantly more rendering work than the UHD 770 Mobile's 12.80 GPixel/s and 25.60 GTexel/s.

For power-constrained mobile systems, the UHD 770 Mobile's 15 W TDP is far more efficient than the Arc B390's 80 W TDP. The UHD 770 Mobile also holds a higher percentile rank at 50 versus the Arc B390's 9, though its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. The Arc B390's nearest rivals are all NVIDIA discrete mobile GPUs from the GT 600 and GT 700 series, which places it in a low-end discrete performance bracket.

The data indicates the Arc B390 is meant for light gaming and accelerated graphics workloads in a newer mobile platform. The UHD 770 Mobile is positioned for basic display output and minimal graphics acceleration. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the UHD 770 Mobile outperforms the Arc B390 in raw compute, fill rate, or API feature support.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc B390 and Intel UHD Graphics 770 Mobile:

• Chip: Panther Lake versus Raptor Lake
• 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 1600 MHz
• Shading units: 1536 versus 256
• TMUs: 48 versus 16
• ROPs: 24 versus 8
• RT cores: 12 versus none
• Pixel rate: 60.00 GPixel/s versus 12.80 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 120.0 GTexel/s versus 25.60 GTexel/s
• FP32: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 819.2 GFLOPS
• FP16: 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 1.638 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
• Average benchmark score: 1482 versus 0
• Percentile: 9 versus 50

Fields that are identical include base clock (300 MHz), memory size/type/bus width (system shared), memory bandwidth (system dependent), display outputs (portable device dependent), OpenGL (4.6), Vulkan (1.4), slot width (IGP), and production status (Active).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single benchmark entry for the Arc B390: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 1482. The UHD 770 Mobile has no recorded benchmark scores, so direct head-to-head numerical comparison is impossible. However, the Arc B390's nearest rival data provides context for its performance level.

The Arc B390's 1482 score places it 1.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% above the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% above the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% above the GeForce GT 710 (1443). These are all older low-end discrete GPUs, which indicates the Arc B390 performs at a level comparable to entry-level discrete graphics from previous generations.

The UHD 770 Mobile's benchmark data is empty, meaning no scores are recorded in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking suggests it sits at the median of all GPUs in the database, but without an average score, the ranking likely reflects its inclusion as an integrated baseline rather than measured performance.

The FP32 compute difference is the most striking numerical gap: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 819.2 GFLOPS. This is a 9.4x advantage for the Arc B390. The FP16 figures show 15.36 TFLOPS versus 1.638 TFLOPS, a similar ratio. The pixel rate difference is 4.7x (60.00 versus 12.80 GPixel/s), and the texture rate difference is also 4.7x (120.0 versus 25.60 GTexel/s).

Where Each One Wins

The Arc B390 wins in every measured performance category. Its 1536 shading units provide 6 times the parallel processing capacity of the UHD 770 Mobile's 256 units. The 12 ray tracing cores give it hardware acceleration for RT workloads, which the UHD 770 Mobile cannot do at all. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) enables features like ray tracing and mesh shaders that the UHD 770 Mobile's DirectX 12 (12_1) cannot access.

The boost clock difference of 2500 MHz versus 1600 MHz means the Arc B390 can sustain higher throughput per clock cycle. Its 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 output is suitable for light gaming and compute tasks, while the UHD 770 Mobile's 819.2 GFLOPS is limited to basic graphics acceleration and video output.

The UHD 770 Mobile's advantages are power efficiency and integration simplicity. At 15 W TDP, it draws 65 W less than the Arc B390's 80 W. This makes it suitable for low-power mobile devices where battery life is prioritized over graphics performance. Its Ring Bus interface may also simplify integration in certain Raptor Lake platforms, though the database does not provide specific performance implications.

The 50th percentile ranking of the UHD 770 Mobile versus the 9th percentile of the Arc B390 is an interesting data point. It suggests that while the Arc B390 has far higher raw specifications, its performance class (based on the 1482 Steel Nomad score) places it near low-end discrete GPUs from over a decade ago. The UHD 770 Mobile's median ranking likely reflects its widespread inclusion in many systems rather than strong performance.

In terms of workload suitability, the Arc B390 is positioned for tasks that require substantial graphics throughput: modern game rendering, ray-traced effects, and compute-heavy shader workloads. The UHD 770 Mobile is limited to basic desktop composition, video playback, and very light 2D/3D acceleration. The data does not support any scenario where the UHD 770 Mobile would be preferred for graphics-intensive work.