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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc Pro B390 versus the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile. With zero benchmark results captured for both parts, the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on the theoretical compute and fill-rate specifications recorded in the database. The Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS. This represents a 4.14x advantage for the Arc Pro B390 in raw shader math. The FP16 figures follow the same pattern, with the Arc Pro B390 producing 15.36 TFLOPS versus 3.712 TFLOPS for the Iris Xe, a 4.14x gap as well, since both parts use a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio.

Pixel throughput shows a smaller but still pronounced lead. The Arc Pro B390 reaches 60.00 GPixel/s, while the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile reaches 29.00 GPixel/s. That is a 2.07x advantage in rasterization throughput. Texture rate shows a similar ratio, with the Arc Pro B390 at 120.0 GTexel/s and the Iris Xe at 58.00 GTexel/s, a 2.07x difference. These figures indicate that the Arc Pro B390 is designed for substantially heavier graphics workloads, while the Iris Xe targets lighter, power-constrained environments.

The wins tally in the database shows zero wins for either part, confirming that no direct benchmark comparisons were recorded. The analysis must therefore interpret the specification gap as the primary indicator of relative performance. The Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. The shading unit count is 2.4x higher on the Arc Pro B390, while the TMU and ROP counts are 1.2x and 1.2x higher respectively. The compute advantage is driven by the shading unit count, while the fill-rate advantage is moderated by the smaller TMU and ROP deltas.

The boost clock difference also contributes to the performance gap. The Arc Pro B390 boosts to 2500 MHz, while the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile boosts to 1450 MHz. This 1.72x clock advantage compounds with the wider execution resources. The base clocks are identical at 300 MHz for both parts. The memory subsystem is recorded as System Shared for both, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent, meaning the memory performance depends entirely on the host platform and cannot be compared directly from the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins in every recorded compute and fill-rate category. Its 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 performance places it in a different class from the Iris Xe's 1.856 TFLOPS. The Arc Pro B390 also has dedicated ray tracing cores, with 12 RT cores recorded, while the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has no RT cores listed. This makes the Arc Pro B390 the clear choice for any workload involving ray-traced effects, as the database records no ray tracing capability for the Iris Xe.

The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile wins in power efficiency. Its TDP is 15 W, compared to 80 W for the Arc Pro B390. This 5.33x power difference means the Iris Xe is suited for thin-and-light mobile devices where thermal and battery constraints dominate. The Iris Xe also uses a Ring Bus interface, while the Arc Pro B390 uses an IGP interface, though both are integrated graphics solutions with no dedicated power connectors.

For gaming and graphics workloads, the Arc Pro B390's higher pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s versus 29.00 GPixel/s means it can drive higher resolutions and refresh rates. The texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s versus 58.00 GTexel/s supports more complex texture filtering in modern games. The FP32 throughput advantage of 4.14x directly translates to faster shader execution, which is critical for compute-heavy effects like physics simulations and post-processing.

For general productivity and media tasks, the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile remains functional but limited. Its 640 shading units and 1450 MHz boost clock are sufficient for basic display output and light acceleration, but the data shows it falls behind the Arc Pro B390 in every measured specification. The Iris Xe supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Arc Pro B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), indicating the newer part also supports additional DirectX 12 Ultimate features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading, though the database does not detail those features explicitly.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architecture generations. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip, fabricated on a 3 nm process node. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses the Generation 12.2 architecture on the Raptor Lake chip, fabricated on a 10 nm process node. This 3 nm versus 10 nm difference explains the significant clock headroom and efficiency gains seen in the newer part. The Arc Pro B390 belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation, while the Iris Xe belongs to the HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake) generation.

The shading resources differ substantially. The Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs, and no RT cores. The EU (execution unit) nomenclature for the Iris Xe suggests a different underlying microarchitecture organization, but the database records only the shading unit counts. The Arc Pro B390's 12 RT cores are a notable architectural addition, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the Iris Xe lacks entirely.

The API support also differs. The Arc Pro B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX 12_2 versus 12_1 distinction indicates the Arc Pro B390 supports the full DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set, including hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders, while the Iris Xe is limited to the baseline DirectX 12 feature level.

The process node difference drives the power envelope. The 3 nm Arc Pro B390 is rated at 80 W TDP, while the 10 nm Iris Xe is rated at 15 W TDP. Despite the higher power, the Arc Pro B390's newer node allows a 2500 MHz boost clock versus 1450 MHz for the Iris Xe. The release dates confirm the generational gap: the Arc Pro B390 was released on 2026-01-26, while the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile was released on 2023-01-03. The Arc Pro B390's predecessor is listed as HD Graphics-WM, while the Iris Xe's successor is listed as Arc Graphics-M, indicating the product line transition toward the Arc branding.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Arc Pro B390 is the superior graphics processor in all recorded performance specifications. Its 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate dwarf the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile's 1.856 TFLOPS, 29.00 GPixel/s, and 58.00 GTexel/s. For any workload requiring shader compute, ray tracing, or high fill rates, the Arc Pro B390 is the only viable option between the two.

The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile retains a role in power-constrained devices. Its 15 W TDP versus 80 W TDP makes it suitable for ultraportable laptops where battery life and thermals take priority over graphics performance. The Arc Pro B390, with its 80 W TDP, requires a more substantial cooling solution and power delivery, which the database reflects in its IGP slot width and lack of power connectors.

The architecture gap reinforces the verdict. The Xe3-LPG architecture on 3 nm provides the Arc Pro B390 with modern features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and hardware ray tracing. The Generation 12.2 architecture on 10 nm limits the Iris Xe to DirectX 12_1 and no ray tracing. Users who need current-generation graphics features should select the Arc Pro B390. Users who prioritize portability and efficiency should consider the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile, but they must accept the substantial compute and feature gap.

The database shows no benchmark scores for either part, so real-world performance cannot be quantified beyond specifications. The percentileVsAllGpus field records 50 for both parts, indicating median positioning in the overall GPU landscape, though this is based on the full database and not the head-to-head comparison. The average benchmark score is 0 for both, confirming the absence of recorded test data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 delivers 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.712 TFLOPS FP16. The Arc Pro B390 is 4.14x faster in both metrics.

Q: Does either GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Only the Intel Arc Pro B390 has ray tracing cores, with 12 RT cores recorded. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has no RT cores listed in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 has a TDP of 80 W, while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has a TDP of 15 W. Both are integrated graphics with no dedicated power connectors.

Q: Which GPU supports newer DirectX features?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The Arc Pro B390's 12_2 feature level includes additional DirectX 12 Ultimate capabilities.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 was released on 2026-01-26. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile was released on 2023-01-03.

Q: Are there any recorded benchmark wins for either GPU?

A: The database records zero head-to-head benchmark entries and zero wins for both the Intel Arc Pro B390 and the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Pro B390 | Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile |

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

| Chip | Panther Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Architecture | Xe3-LPG | Generation 12.2 |

| Generation | Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) | HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2500 MHz | 1450 MHz |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 640 |

| TMUs | 48 | 40 |

| ROPs | 24 | 20 |

| RT Cores | 12 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 60.00 GPixel/s | 29.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 120.0 GTexel/s | 58.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.680 TFLOPS | 1.856 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) | 3.712 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 15 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | Ring Bus |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2026-01-26 | 2023-01-03 |

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-WM | None |

| Successor | None | Arc Graphics-M |