Intel Arc B390 vs NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the core architectural difference between the Intel Arc B390 and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation?

A: The Intel Arc B390 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture built on a 3 nm process at Intel, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses Ada Lovelace on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA chip, AD106, contains 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, whereas the Intel chip's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between these two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Arc B390 uses System Shared memory, with the bus width and memory type both listed as System Shared, and bandwidth is System Dependent.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput in FP32 operations?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.62 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is roughly double the Intel Arc B390's 7.680 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part also offers 15.62 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while Intel provides 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1).

Q: What are the TDP figures for these two mobile GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has a TDP of 80 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 115 W. Both are IGP slot width devices with no power connectors, and both use Portable Device Dependent display outputs.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 rank against other GPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has a percentile ranking of 9 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482 from a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% behind), NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% behind), NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% behind), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% behind).

Q: What is the release timing difference between the two products?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has a release date of 2026-01-26, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation was released on 2023-03-20. The NVIDIA part lists its predecessor as Ampere-MW and successor as Blackwell-MW, while the Intel part has no predecessor or successor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents an asymmetric picture. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation holds the clear advantage in nearly every measurable computing category, while the Intel Arc B390's strengths are limited to its integrated nature and power envelope.

For raw throughput, the NVIDIA part wins decisively. Its FP32 performance of 15.62 TFLOPS is more than double the Intel Arc B390's 7.680 TFLOPS. In texture operations, NVIDIA's 244.1 GTexel/s far exceeds Intel's 120.0 GTexel/s. Similarly, pixel throughput favors NVIDIA at 81.36 GPixel/s versus Intel's 60.00 GPixel/s. These gaps indicate that for any workload involving dense shading, texturing, or pixel processing, the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers roughly double or better the compute headroom.

The Intel Arc B390 wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 80 W TDP is lower than the NVIDIA part's 115 W, and it uses System Shared memory, which eliminates dedicated VRAM power draw and board space. For thin-and-light portable devices where thermal and power budgets are constrained, the Intel part offers a lower-power path with acceptable baseline performance. The database shows Intel's single benchmark score of 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile overall, which indicates it is positioned for basic graphics tasks rather than demanding workloads.

The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation also wins on memory architecture. The dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, predictable performance without depending on system RAM speed or allocation. The Intel part's System Dependent bandwidth means its real-world throughput varies with the host platform's memory configuration, making it less suitable for consistent high-bandwidth applications.

In terms of platform flexibility, the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which allows it to be paired with a wide range of motherboards and CPUs. The Intel Arc B390 is an IGP with no separate bus interface, meaning it is permanently tied to its host processor. This makes the NVIDIA part the more versatile option for system builders, while the Intel part is limited to specific Panther Lake platforms.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Arc B390 is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, which is Intel's low-power graphics microarchitecture designed for integrated graphics within the Panther Lake processor. It uses a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, a high-performance discrete GPU design, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process.

The NVIDIA chip, AD106, is a substantial die at 188 mm² with 22,900 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². Intel's die size and transistor count are listed as unknown, but the 3 nm process and integrated nature suggest a much smaller footprint optimized for power-constrained mobile use.

Compute resources differ dramatically. The Intel Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 36 RT cores, and 144 tensor cores. NVIDIA's part also includes tensor cores for AI acceleration, a feature entirely absent from the Intel part's specification.

The ray tracing capabilities also differ in scale. Intel provides 12 RT cores, while NVIDIA provides 36 RT cores, giving the NVIDIA part three times the ray tracing hardware. This translates to substantially higher throughput for ray-traced lighting and shadow effects in supported games and applications.

FP16 processing reveals a key architectural choice. The Intel Arc B390 uses a 2:1 ratio for FP16 versus FP32, meaning it can double its throughput when using half-precision math, reaching 15.36 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses a 1:1 ratio, maintaining 15.62 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16. This means NVIDIA does not gain extra throughput from FP16 workloads, but it also does not sacrifice FP32 performance.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature support is identical. The difference lies in the execution hardware behind those APIs.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds show a notable divergence. The Intel Arc B390 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation runs at 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost. Intel's wider clock range reflects its power-saving integrated design, while NVIDIA's narrower range indicates a more consistently high-performance operating point.

Memory is the most significant specification gap. The Intel part uses System Shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and bandwidth that varies with the host system. The NVIDIA part uses 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s fixed bandwidth and memory clocked at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

The shading resources differ by a factor of three. Intel has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. NVIDIA has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Every one of these counts is exactly three times higher on the NVIDIA part, indicating a deliberate scaling of the compute pipeline.

The TDP figures are 80 W for Intel and 115 W for NVIDIA. Both are IGP slot width devices with no power connectors, and both use Portable Device Dependent display outputs. Neither has a suggested PSU listed.

The bus interface differs: Intel is IGP only, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This reflects the fundamental integration difference between the two products.

Release dates are separated by nearly three years, with NVIDIA launching on 2023-03-20 and Intel on 2026-01-26. The NVIDIA part lists its predecessor as Ampere-MW and successor as Blackwell-MW, while the Intel part has no such lineage in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains only one benchmark entry for the Intel Arc B390 and no benchmark entries for the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. This makes a direct numerical comparison of measured scores impossible. However, the available data and specifications allow for meaningful inference.

The Intel Arc B390's single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1482. This places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are all low-end NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), the GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% lower). This clustering indicates that the Intel Arc B390 performs at the level of entry-level discrete GPUs from over a decade ago.

The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation, by contrast, has a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, which is a mid-pack position. Its FP32 throughput of 15.62 TFLOPS is 2.03 times the Intel part's 7.680 TFLOPS. Texture rate is 244.1 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, a 2.03x advantage. Pixel rate is 81.36 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s, a 1.36x advantage.

The RT core count difference is 36 versus 12, a 3x advantage for NVIDIA. The tensor core count of 144 on the NVIDIA part has no equivalent on the Intel side. Memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s on NVIDIA versus System Dependent on Intel represents a massive gap for any bandwidth-sensitive workload.

Given that the NVIDIA part's FP32 and texture throughput are both roughly double the Intel part's, and its pixel rate is about 35% higher, a 3DMark Steel Nomad score for the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation would likely be in the range of 2 to 3 times the Intel score, assuming the benchmark scales with compute resources. The 50th percentile ranking versus the 9th percentile ranking supports this expectation.

The wins are thus one-sided in terms of raw performance. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation wins every compute, memory, and feature comparison. The Intel Arc B390's only advantages are its lower 80 W TDP and its integration into the host processor, which eliminates the need for separate VRAM and associated board space. For users who prioritize battery life and minimal footprint over performance, the Intel part has a role. For any workload that demands graphics throughput, the NVIDIA part is the clear choice based on the recorded specifications and the percentile data.