Intel Arc Pro B390 vs NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no benchmark scores for either the Intel Arc Pro B390 or the NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB. Both entries report an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs, with no head-to-head results, no wins for either part, and no nearest rivals listed. Consequently, the quantitative comparison must rely on the architectural and specification data available, rather than measured performance deltas.

The most decisive computational advantage belongs to the NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB. Its FP32 throughput of 51.22 TFLOPS is roughly 6.7 times the Intel Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS. In FP16 compute, the gap widens substantially: the H800 delivers 204.9 TFLOPS (4:1 ratio) against the Intel part's 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a factor of approximately 13.3. The texture rate follows the same pattern, with the H800 at 800.3 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s for the Arc Pro B390, an advantage of about 6.7 times. The pixel rate, however, is closer: the Intel part achieves 60.00 GPixel/s, which is 42% higher than the H800's 42.12 GPixel/s, reflecting the Intel GPU's higher boost clock and smaller raster footprint.

Memory capacity and bandwidth are not comparable in the conventional sense. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB carries 80 GB of HBM2e over a 5120-bit bus, delivering 2.04 TB/s. The H800 also holds a substantial shading unit count advantage: 14592 shading units versus 1536, and 456 TMUs versus 48. Both parts have 24 ROPs, making the pixel-rate result notable given the extreme differences elsewhere. The Intel Arc Pro B390 includes 12 ray tracing cores; the H800 entry lists no RT cores but instead 456 tensor cores, which the Intel part lacks entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built for entirely different environments and derive from different foundry processes. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process, and belongs to the Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake) generation. The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB uses the GH100 chip with Hopper architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, and belongs to the Server Hopper (Hxx) generation. Transistor counts and die size are unknown for the Intel part; the NVIDIA chip contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a transistor density of 98.3M per mm².

Clock behavior differs sharply. The Intel Arc Pro B390 runs a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 2500 MHz, while the NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB operates at a base of 1095 MHz and boosts to 1755 MHz. The Intel part's higher boost clock helps explain its lead in pixel rate despite having identical ROP counts. The H800's memory clock is 1593 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective data rate; the Intel part's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Power and physical design reflect their intended roles. The Intel Arc Pro B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with an 80 W TDP, no power connectors, and a bus interface of IGP. The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB is a dual-slot add-in card with a 350 W TDP, a single 16-pin power connector, and a suggested power supply of 750 W. The H800 measures 268 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with no display outputs; the Intel part's display outputs are described as portable device dependent. The H800 uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface.

API support also separates them. The Intel Arc Pro B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database, consistent with a server accelerator without display outputs.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two products serve mutually exclusive purposes, and the selection depends entirely on workload type. The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB is the clear choice for compute-heavy server workloads. Its FP32 performance of 51.22 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 204.9 TFLOPS, combined with 80 GB of HBM2e memory at 2.04 TB/s, place it in a different performance class. The 456 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for matrix operations, and the 14592 shading units supply massive parallel throughput. The 350 W TDP and 750 W suggested power supply indicate a system designed for sustained, high-intensity compute.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 fits an integrated, low-power context. Its 80 W TDP, 300 MHz base clock, and system shared memory indicate it is intended for portable or compact devices where discrete power delivery is unavailable. Its 12 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it a feature set suited to graphics and ray-traced workloads, and its 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate exceeds the H800's 42.12 GPixel/s. However, its 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 figures are a fraction of the H800's, so any compute-heavy task would favor the NVIDIA part decisively.

The H800 also holds a production status edge in terms of market maturity: it was released on 2023-03-20, while the Intel Arc Pro B390 carries a release date of 2026-01-26. The H800's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell; the Intel part's predecessor is HD Graphics-WM with no successor listed. No launch MSRP exists for either product, so no cost-based comparison is possible from the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB delivers 51.22 TFLOPS FP32, which is approximately 6.7 times the Intel Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has 80 GB of HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has 14592 shading units. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B390 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 12 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB does not list RT cores in the database, but it does have 456 tensor cores.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 has an 80 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors. The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has a 350 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin power connector, and requires a suggested 750 W power supply.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 achieves 60.00 GPixel/s, which is 42% higher than the NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB's 42.12 GPixel/s, despite both having 24 ROPs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB wins in every compute throughput category recorded. Its FP32 output of 51.22 TFLOPS dwarfs the Intel part's 7.680 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 204.9 TFLOPS is more than 13 times the Intel part's 15.36 TFLOPS. Texture rate favors the H800 at 800.3 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s. The H800's 456 tensor cores and 14592 shading units give it a hardware advantage for parallel matrix operations and general compute. The 80 GB HBM2e memory pool with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth supports large datasets that would not fit in the Intel part's system shared memory. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides a high-bandwidth host connection, and the dual-slot form factor allows for dedicated cooling in a server chassis.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins in specific architectural and efficiency categories. Its 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate exceeds the H800's 42.12 GPixel/s by 42%, a result driven by its 2500 MHz boost clock against the H800's 1755 MHz. Its 80 W TDP is a fraction of the H800's 350 W, making it suitable for integrated designs without external power. The 12 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support give it a complete graphics API stack, whereas the H800 lists no display outputs and no graphics API support. The 3 nm Intel process node is smaller than the 5 nm TSMC node used for the H800, though transistor and die size data for the Intel part are unknown. The Intel part's 300 MHz base clock and 2500 MHz boost clock also show a wider clock range than the H800's 1095 MHz to 1755 MHz.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across every major specification field in the database.

Process and chip: Intel Arc Pro B390 uses Panther Lake on a 3 nm Intel process; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB uses GH100 on a 5 nm TSMC process. The H800 has 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die with 98.3M per mm² density; transistor count and die size for the Intel part are unknown.

Clocks: Intel Arc Pro B390 runs 300 MHz base and 2500 MHz boost; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB runs 1095 MHz base and 1755 MHz boost. Memory clock for the Intel part is system shared; the H800 memory clock is 1593 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective.

Memory: Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has 80 GB HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus with 2.04 TB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: Intel Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 12 RT cores, and no tensor cores; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has 14592 shading units, 456 TMUs, 24 ROPs, no RT cores, and 456 tensor cores.

Rates: Intel Arc Pro B390 achieves 60.00 GPixel/s and 120.0 GTexel/s, with 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1); NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB achieves 42.12 GPixel/s and 800.3 GTexel/s, with 51.22 TFLOPS FP32 and 204.9 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1).

Power and physical: Intel Arc Pro B390 has an 80 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and an IGP bus interface; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has a 350 W TDP, dual-slot width, one 16-pin power connector, a 750 W suggested PSU, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface.

Outputs and dimensions: Intel Arc Pro B390 has portable device dependent display outputs and no dimensions listed; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB has no display outputs and measures 268 mm in length and 111 mm in height.

APIs: Intel Arc Pro B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support.

Release and lineage: Intel Arc Pro B390 released 2026-01-26 with predecessor HD Graphics-WM and no successor; NVIDIA H800 PCIe 80 GB released 2023-03-20 with predecessor Server Ada and successor Server Blackwell. Both carry a production status of Active, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded.