Intel Arc Pro B390 vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data places both the Intel Arc Pro B390 and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, with no average benchmark score differentiating them. For workloads that depend on raw FP32 throughput, texture mapping, and pixel fill, the NVIDIA part holds a clear arithmetic lead: its 12.35 TFLOPS FP32 versus 7.680 TFLOPS, its 193.0 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, and its 96.48 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s. For power-constrained embedded designs, the NVIDIA GPU delivers that higher compute within a 50 W envelope, while the Intel part consumes 80 W. Meanwhile, the Intel Arc Pro B390 counters with a faster boost clock (2500 MHz versus 2010 MHz), a more advanced 3 nm process node, and a newer release date (2026-01-26 versus 2023-03-20). The data suggests that buyers prioritizing compute density per watt should select the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation, while those prioritizing the newest architecture node and higher peak clock may favor the Intel Arc Pro B390.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge fundamentally in their underlying designs. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's foundry. Its generation is listed as Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake), and it succeeds the HD Graphics-WM. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its generation is Ada-MW, with the Ampere-MW as predecessor and Blackwell-MW as successor.

Transistor and die data exist only for the NVIDIA part: it integrates 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.9M per mm². The Intel part's transistor count and die size are both listed as unknown. Clock behavior differs notably: the Intel GPU has a 300 MHz base clock and a 2500 MHz boost clock, while the NVIDIA GPU runs at 1530 MHz base and 2010 MHz boost. Memory architecture separates them completely. The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory, with its bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth and running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Compute resource counts favor NVIDIA across the board. The RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 3072 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, 48 raster output units, 24 ray tracing cores, and 96 tensor cores. The Intel Arc Pro B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores, with no tensor core count listed. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA GPU connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Intel part uses an IGP bus interface. Both are integrated-class (IGP slot width) with no power connectors and display outputs described as portable device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark entries, no wins for either part, and equal average benchmark scores of zero. The analysis therefore rests on the specification-derived throughput figures. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation leads in every measured throughput category. Its FP32 compute of 12.35 TFLOPS is 60.8% higher than the Intel part's 7.680 TFLOPS. Texture rate shows a similar gap: 193.0 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, a 60.8% advantage. Pixel rate differences are less extreme but still favor NVIDIA: 96.48 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s, a 60.8% margin. The NVIDIA GPU's FP16 output matches its FP32 at 12.35 TFLOPS (1:1), while the Intel part reaches 15.36 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), giving Intel the only throughput win in the comparison. That FP16 advantage is exactly 2.0x its own FP32 figure, whereas NVIDIA's FP16 equals its FP32.

Clock rates tell a different story. The Intel Arc Pro B390 boosts to 2500 MHz, which is 24.4% higher than NVIDIA's 2010 MHz boost. Its base clock of 300 MHz is dramatically lower than NVIDIA's 1530 MHz, indicating a wider clock range on the Intel side. The Intel GPU's 80 W TDP contrasts with NVIDIA's 50 W TDP, meaning the NVIDIA part delivers higher FP32, texture, and pixel throughput while consuming 37.5% less power. Memory bandwidth is another decisive split: NVIDIA's dedicated 256.0 GB/s versus Intel's system-dependent shared memory, which cannot be quantified from the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation, at 12.35 TFLOPS, exceeds the Intel Arc Pro B390's 7.680 TFLOPS by roughly 60%.

Q: How do the memory systems differ?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 has an 80 W TDP, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has a 50 W TDP. Neither requires power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B390 boosts to 2500 MHz, compared to the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation's 2010 MHz boost.

Q: Do both support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the release timeline difference?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation was released on 2023-03-20, while the Intel Arc Pro B390 has a release date of 2026-01-26.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation wins in all primary compute throughput categories except FP16. Applications that rely on FP32 shader work, texture sampling, or rasterization will see higher limits from the NVIDIA GPU: 12.35 TFLOPS FP32, 193.0 GTexel/s texture rate, and 96.48 GPixel/s pixel rate. Its 96 tensor cores provide a hardware path for AI inference workloads, a feature the Intel part does not list. The dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth removes dependence on system memory performance, which is critical for embedded systems where the CPU and GPU share a memory pool. The lower 50 W TDP also makes the NVIDIA part suitable for thermally constrained portable devices.

The Intel Arc Pro B390 wins in FP16 compute, delivering 15.36 TFLOPS versus NVIDIA's 12.35 TFLOPS. That 2:1 FP16 ratio suggests efficiency in half-precision workloads, potentially relevant for AI inference or compute tasks that tolerate reduced precision. The higher 2500 MHz boost clock may benefit latency-sensitive workloads that scale with clock speed rather than parallel throughput. The 3 nm process node represents a newer manufacturing generation than NVIDIA's 5 nm, and the 2026 release date indicates a more recent design. For systems where the IGP bus interface is preferred over PCIe 4.0 x16, the Intel part integrates directly into the processor package.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Pro B390 | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | Xe3-LPG | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | unknown | 18,900 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 159 mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1530 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2500 MHz | 2010 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 48 | 96 |

| ROPs | 24 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 60.00 GPixel/s | 96.48 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 120.0 GTexel/s | 193.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.680 TFLOPS | 12.35 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1) | 12.35 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 50 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Release Date | 2026-01-26 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | HD Graphics-WM | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | null | Blackwell-MW |