AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM vs Intel Arc Pro B390 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM and the Intel Arc Pro B390 serve fundamentally different roles. The RX 7400 OEM is a discrete, single-slot graphics card with dedicated GDDR6 memory, while the Arc Pro B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built into Intel's Panther Lake platform. The recorded data shows the RX 7400 OEM leading in raw pixel throughput, texture processing, and FP32 compute, while the Arc Pro B390 counters with a significantly higher boost clock, doubled FP16 throughput, and a more advanced 3 nm process node. For users needing a standalone GPU with dedicated VRAM and a PCIe interface, the RX 7400 OEM is the clear choice. For compact, power-constrained systems where integrated graphics are the only option, the Arc Pro B390 provides competitive compute within an 80 W TDP envelope. Neither part dominates outright; the data indicates a split decision based on workload and form factor requirements.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM wins in several measurable categories. Its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s exceeds the Arc Pro B390's 60.00 GPixel/s, giving it a 17.3% advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios such as high-resolution rasterization. Its texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s also edges out the Intel part's 120.0 GTexel/s, a 2.7% margin. The RX 7400 OEM delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus the Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS, a 2.7% lead in single-precision workloads. It also has more shading units (1792 vs 1536), more texture mapping units (112 vs 48), more raster output units (64 vs 24), and more ray tracing cores (28 vs 12). Memory bandwidth is a decisive advantage: the RX 7400 OEM provides 172.8 GB/s from its 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, whereas the Arc Pro B390 relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," which in practice is far lower and variable.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins in other areas. Its boost clock of 2500 MHz is substantially higher than the RX 7400 OEM's 1100 MHz, and its base clock of 300 MHz is only slightly lower than the AMD part's 330 MHz. The Arc Pro B390 delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP16 compute at a 2:1 ratio, exactly double the RX 7400 OEM's 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). This makes the Intel part markedly stronger for FP16-heavy workloads such as certain AI inference tasks and mixed-precision compute. The Arc Pro B390 is manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process, compared to TSMC's 6 nm for the RX 7400 OEM, indicating a newer fabrication node. The Intel part also carries an "Active" production status, while the RX 7400 OEM's production status is not recorded. Power consumption differs: the Arc Pro B390 is rated at 80 W TDP with no power connectors, while the RX 7400 OEM draws 55 W and requires a single 6-pin connector.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM uses the Navi 33 chip built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." It belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation and is fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The die measures 204 mm² and contains 13,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Panther Lake chip based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation. It is built on Intel's own 3 nm process, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown in the database.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The RX 7400 OEM has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a fixed 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." This means the Intel part's memory performance hinges entirely on the host system's RAM configuration, a variable that cannot be quantified from the recorded data. The RX 7400 OEM's memory clock is 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective), while the Arc Pro B390's memory clock is simply "System Shared."

Compute resource distribution differs significantly. The RX 7400 OEM has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. Despite having fewer execution resources, the Arc Pro B390 achieves similar FP32 throughput (7.680 TFLOPS vs 7.885 TFLOPS) thanks to its much higher boost clock of 2500 MHz versus 1100 MHz. The FP16 ratio also differs: the RX 7400 OEM processes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Arc Pro B390 uses a 2:1 ratio, doubling its FP16 output to 15.36 TFLOPS.

Form factor and interface are starkly different. The RX 7400 OEM is a single-slot, 167 mm (6.6 inches) long discrete card that connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and requires a 250 W suggested power supply. The Arc Pro B390 is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and an IGP bus interface. Display outputs on the AMD card are 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the Intel part's outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The release dates differ: the RX 7400 OEM launched on August 7, 2025, and the Arc Pro B390 on January 26, 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM delivers 7.885 TFLOPS, which is 2.7% higher than the Intel Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The RX 7400 OEM has a fixed 172.8 GB/s from its 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent," so no fixed figure exists in the data.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 boosts to 2500 MHz, well above the RX 7400 OEM's 1100 MHz boost clock.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The RX 7400 OEM has a 55 W TDP and needs one 6-pin power connector plus a 250 W suggested power supply. The Arc Pro B390 has an 80 W TDP but requires no power connectors and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Both support ray tracing. The RX 7400 OEM has 28 ray tracing cores, while the Arc Pro B390 has 12.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The RX 7400 OEM is built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the Arc Pro B390 uses Intel's 3 nm process.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head benchmark data shows no direct benchmark scores for either GPU, so the comparison relies on the specification-derived metrics in the database. The largest win for the AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM is in pixel fill rate. At 70.40 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s, the AMD card leads by 10.40 GPixel/s, a 17.3% advantage. This translates to better rasterization throughput in traditional rendering pipelines. Texture rate also favors AMD, with 123.2 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, a 3.2 GTexel/s difference or 2.7%. FP32 compute is nearly tied, with AMD's 7.885 TFLOPS beating Intel's 7.680 TFLOPS by 0.205 TFLOPS, again 2.7%. The RX 7400 OEM's ray tracing core count of 28 versus 12 gives it more than double the RT hardware, although no benchmark scores quantify the real-world impact.

The Intel Arc Pro B390's biggest win is in FP16 compute. At 15.36 TFLOPS, it doubles the RX 7400 OEM's 7.885 TFLOPS, a 94.9% advantage. This is a decisive margin for any workload that can exploit half-precision arithmetic. The boost clock advantage is also substantial: 2500 MHz versus 1100 MHz, a 1400 MHz difference or 127% higher. This clock headroom explains how the Intel part approaches AMD's FP32 output despite having 14.3% fewer shading units (1536 vs 1792). The Arc Pro B390 also wins on process node, with Intel's 3 nm versus TSMC's 6 nm, and on production status, being listed as "Active" while the RX 7400 OEM's status is not recorded.

In resource counts, the RX 7400 OEM leads across the board: 1792 vs 1536 shading units (16.7% more), 112 vs 48 TMUs (133% more), 64 vs 24 ROPs (167% more), and 28 vs 12 ray tracing cores (133% more). The AMD card's 204 mm² die with 13,300 million transistors is fully specified, while the Intel part's die size and transistor count are unknown. The RX 7400 OEM's 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth is a concrete advantage over the Arc Pro B390's system shared memory, which has no fixed specifications.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification category where data is recorded. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM uses the Navi 33 chip on RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Panther Lake chip on Xe3-LPG architecture. Process nodes: 6 nm (TSMC) versus 3 nm (Intel). Transistor count: 13,300 million versus unknown. Die size: 204 mm² versus unknown. Transistor density: 65.2 million per mm² versus not recorded.

Clocks differ sharply. The RX 7400 OEM has a 330 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost, while the Arc Pro B390 has a 300 MHz base and 2500 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for the AMD card versus "System Shared" for the Intel part. Memory size is 8 GB GDDR6 versus "System Shared," with bus widths of 128 bit versus "System Shared." Bandwidth is 172.8 GB/s versus "System Dependent."

Compute resources: 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores for AMD; 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores for Intel. Pixel rate is 70.40 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 123.2 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 7.885 TFLOPS versus 7.680 TFLOPS. FP16 is 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and form factor: the RX 7400 OEM has a 55 W TDP, is single-slot, uses a 1x 6-pin connector, and has a 250 W suggested PSU. The Arc Pro B390 has an 80 W TDP, is an IGP, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD versus IGP for Intel. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD versus "Portable Device Dependent" for Intel. The RX 7400 OEM is 167 mm (6.6 inches) long; the Arc Pro B390 has no dimensions recorded. Release dates: August 7, 2025, for the AMD card and January 26, 2026, for the Intel part. Production status is not recorded for AMD and "Active" for Intel. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, with average benchmark scores of zero and no nearest rivals listed.