Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU

Intel Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU

The Intel Arc B390 (or Arc Pro B390) Panther Lake iGPU with 12 Xe3 cores is the most powerful integrated graphics card in the Intel Panther Lake SoC series with 12 Xe3 cores. The 12 cores result in 96 CUs and 1,536 ALUs. Initial benchmarks show a significant increase in performance compared to the Intel Arc 140T in Arrow Lake.

Intel itself states that the Panther Lake iGPU offers >50% performance compared to Lunar Lake (Intel Arc 140V) and >40% performance / watt compared to Arrow Lake H (Intel Arc 140T). This means that the current RDNA 3.5 iGPU from AMD (AMD Radeon 890M in Strix Point APUs) should be clearly outperformed. However, it will probably remain behind Strix Halo (AMD Radeon 8050S).

Our tests show the Arc B390 is approaching the RTX 4050 Laptop GPU (Intel is 6-25% slower than Nvidia), while also trailing the faster Radeon 8050S by 20-35%, depending on the application or game.

Furthermore, the performance will depend heavily on the cooling and the guaranteed TDP. However, the performance should also be sufficient for playable frame rates in low settings for demanding games such as Anno 117 or The Outer Worlds 2.

The new media engine now supports AV1 encode and decode, VVC decode, AVC 10-bit and eDP 1.5.

The GPU chiplet is produced at TSMC in the modern N3E 3nm process.

CodenamePanther Lake iGPU
iGPUIntegrated Graphics
Pipelines96 - unified
Raytracing Cores12
Core Speed2500 (Boost) MHz
AI GPU122 TOPS INT8
CacheL2: 16 MB
Shared Memoryyes
APIDirectX 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, OpenCL 3.0
Man. Technology3 nm
Displays4 Displays (max.), HDMI 2.1 FRL, DisplayPort 2.1 UHBR20
Date of Announcement05.01.2026
CPU in Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPUGPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H16 x 1600 MHz, 25 W? MHz2500 MHz
Intel Core Ultra X7 368H16 x 1600 MHz, 25 W? MHz2500 MHz
Intel Core Ultra X7 358H16 x 1500 MHz, 25 W? MHz2500 MHz
min. - max.? MHz2500 MHz

Benchmarks

3DMark - 3DMark Speed Way Score
min: 924     avg: 982     median: 982 (7%)     max: 1040 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Steel Nomad
1667 Points (11%)
3DMark - 3DMark Steel Nomad Light
min: 6000     avg: 6169     median: 6169 (14%)     max: 6338 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Solar Bay
30578 Points (14%)
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score
min: 14258     avg: 14400     median: 14336 (22%)     max: 14605 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
min: 17054     avg: 17292     median: 17324 (16%)     max: 17498 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Score
min: 7270     avg: 7541     median: 7546 (20%)     max: 7807 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Graphics
min: 4567     avg: 6376     median: 6500 (13%)     max: 7190 Points
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score
min: 44565     avg: 46302     median: 46301.5 (44%)     max: 48038 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
min: 75907     avg: 79358     median: 79357.5 (20%)     max: 82808 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score
min: 18603     avg: 18829     median: 18628 (23%)     max: 19256 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU
min: 18313     avg: 18625     median: 18743 (14%)     max: 18819 Points
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
Unigine Valley 1.0 - Unigine Valley 1.0 DX
53.5 fps (16%)
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 201     avg: 227     median: 228 (13%)     max: 252 fps
Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit
97.8 % (98%)
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official Medium Offscreen 1080
min: 104.6     avg: 277.4     median: 104.6 (3%)     max: 623 fps
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official High Offscreen 2160
3.6 fps (1%)
Geekbench 6.5 - Geekbench 6.5 GPU OpenCL
min: 56493     avg: 56769     median: 56527 (14%)     max: 57288 points
Geekbench 6.5 - Geekbench 6.5 GPU Vulkan
min: 58963     avg: 60351     median: 60061 (15%)     max: 62028 points
Power Consumption - Furmark Stress Test Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 56     avg: 59.3     median: 58.2 (8%)     max: 63.7 Watt
0510152025303540455055606570Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption 150cd *
min: 51.4     avg: 63     median: 61.3 (17%)     max: 76.3 Watt
05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 34     avg: 55.3     median: 53.5 (7%)     max: 75.3 Watt
05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Power Consumption - Power Efficiency - Cyberpunk 2077 ultra
min: 0.533     avg: 0.7     median: 0.7 (2%)     max: 0.793 fps per Watt
- Range of benchmark values
red legend - Average benchmark values
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

Anno 117: Pax Romana

Anno 117: Pax Romana

2025
low 1920x1080
58  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
42.9  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
30.4  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
17.7  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
12.3  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
104.3 111.2 176.7 ~ 131 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
57 57.5 58.1 ~ 58 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
42.4 42.5 43.8 ~ 43 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
28 29.4 30.4 ~ 29 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
19.2 20.1 20.9 ~ 20 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
52  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
43.6  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
33.4  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
17.9  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
62  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
54.4  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
46.9  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
34.8  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
25  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
F1 25

F1 25

2025
low 1920x1080
147.8  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
121  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
92 92.8 ~ 92 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Ultra High Preset 16xAF TAA 1920x1080
28
29.6
low 1920x1080
34  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
33  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
29  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
21  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
18  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
267  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
154.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
98.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
QHD 2560x1440
69.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
40.1  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
33.1  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
31  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
25.4  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
42.6  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
34.2  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
33.2  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
29.6  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
21.1  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
43 45 ~ 44 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
34 35 ~ 35 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
26 28 ~ 27 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
14 15 ~ 15 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
11 11 ~ 11 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Additional Benchmarks
low TSR 100 1280x720
51
69
F1 24

F1 24

2024
low 1920x1080
145.2 145.9 146.3 ~ 146 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
132.2 134.3 135 ~ 134 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
100.7 104.3 104.7 ~ 103 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
36.2 38 38.6 ~ 38 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
23.8 25.2 25.4 ~ 25 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
225  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
150.3  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
108.9  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
91.9  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
62  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
68.6 77.7 78.7 ~ 75 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
56.2 63.1 63.2 63.9 ~ 62 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
46.9 53.8 54 ~ 52 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
27.2 33.2 36.5 40.9 41.2 44.8 47.2 47.7 ~ 40 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
24.7 28.3 28.9 ~ 27 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset (FSR off) 1280x720
110.6
94.4
Ray Tracing Ultra Preset (DLSS off) 1920x1080
20.2
16.1
30min Start Ultra Preset (FSR off) 1920x1080
40.1
39.1
34.2
31.4
26.1
46.3
40.6
low 1920x1080
64.3 68.2 71.4 ~ 68 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
52.3 55.4 60.8 ~ 56 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
45.7 49 54.3 ~ 50 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
44.6 48.7 50.1 53.4 ~ 49 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
QHD 2560x1440
31.4 34.9 37.8 ~ 35 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset SMAA 1280x720
93.8
87
low 1280x720
180  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
87  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
81  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
66 70 ~ 68 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
48  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Strange Brigade

Strange Brigade

2018
low 1280x720
384 388 400 ~ 391 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
132.7 138.6 141.2 ~ 137 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
103.3 103.4 107.6 ~ 105 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
95.1 99.4 99.5 ~ 98 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
68 71.7 72.3 ~ 71 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Far Cry 5

Far Cry 5

2018
low 1280x720
142  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
87  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
79  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
73  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
53  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1280x720
51.8 58.5 59.7 ~ 57 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
45.5 47.1 47.5 ~ 47 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
39.7 40.3 41.2 ~ 40 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
123.5 134.5 134.8 ~ 131 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
73.7 76.1 83 ~ 78 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
52.8 54.1 55.4 ~ 54 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
39 41 43.1 ~ 41 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
119.8 135 154.5 ~ 136 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
92.6 95.4 102.3 ~ 97 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
103.5 107.6 109.8 ~ 107 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
102.5 105.4 111.8 ~ 107 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
GTA V

GTA V

2015
low 1024x768
176.7 179.4 ~ 178 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
171 173 ~ 172 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
98.2 111.9 113.8 ~ 108 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
43.3 45.1 45.3 ~ 45 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
30.6 30.9 31.5 ~ 31 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Additional Benchmarks
Normal/Off 4xAF 1920x1080
171.3
168.2
Lowest Settings possible 1920x1080
175.2
172
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
Anno 117: Pax Romana5842.930.417.712.3
ARC Raiders13158432920
The Outer Worlds 25243.633.417.9
Battlefield 66254.446.934.825
F1 25147.812192
Assassin's Creed Shadows3433292118
Civilization 7267154.298.869.8
Monster Hunter Wilds40.133.13125.4
Indiana Jones and the Great Circle42.634.233.229.621.1
Black Myth: Wukong4435271511
F1 241461341033825
Total War Pharaoh225150.3108.991.962
Cyberpunk 20777562524027
Baldur's Gate 36856504935
Shadow of the Tomb Raider18087816848
Strange Brigade3911371059871
Far Cry 514287797353
X-Plane 11.11574740
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark131785441
Dota 2 Reborn13697107107
GTA V1781721084531
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps

7
3
11

10
5
6
2
10
9
7
5
5
8
5
3



For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

search for model:
v1.35
log 22. 17:58:56

#0 ran 0s before starting gpusingle class +0s ... 0s

#1 no ids found in url (should be separated by "_") +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sun, 22 Feb 2026 05:30:28 +0100 +0.003s ... 0.003s

#4 composed specs +0.015s ... 0.017s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.017s

#6 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.017s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 13268 +0.015s ... 0.032s

#8 got single benchmarks 13268 +0.02s ... 0.052s

#9 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.052s

#10 min, max, avg, median took s +1.296s ... 1.348s

#11 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 1.348s

#12 Got 368 rows for game benchmarks. +0.097s ... 1.445s

#13 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 1.445s

#14 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.016s ... 1.461s

#15 benchmarks composed for output. +0.247s ... 1.708s

#16 return log +0.548s ... 2.255s

Notebook reviews with Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU graphics card

Dell XPS 14 2026 review: Fully reborn with Intel Panther Lake X7

Dell XPS 14 2026 review: Fully reborn with Intel Panther Lake X7

The XPS series has gone through some bumps on the road, but the latest Panther Lake XPS 14 puts the family back on track to be a much easier recommendation than any recent predecessor.
Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 14", 1.4 kg
Asus ExpertBook Ultra review: One helluva debut for Intel Panther Lake X7

Asus ExpertBook Ultra review: One helluva debut for Intel Panther Lake X7

Asus and Intel are starting off the year strong with the debut of the Core Ultra X7 358H. Although technically a business-oriented laptop, both graphics performance and performance-per-watt are insane for a 14-inch form factor.
Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 14", 1.1 kg
Intel Arc B390 performance and efficiency analysis. (Image Source: Intel)

Intel Panther Lake Arc B390 performance and efficiency analysis: Intel's new iGPU trades blows with the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4050

The new Panther Lake processors from Intel not only offer more CPU performance, but above all utilize a very fast integrated graphics card. The Arc B390 is around 70% faster than the previous iGPUs and can even keep up with the GeForce RTX 4050 Laptop GPU. Update: More comparisons with AMD Strix Halo
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 14", 1.7 kg
Intel Panther Lake Core Ultra X9 388H performance analysis - Outpaces Arrow Lake and exceeds Zen 5 in efficiency

Intel Panther Lake Core Ultra X9 388H performance analysis - Outpaces Arrow Lake and exceeds Zen 5 in efficiency

Intel's new mobile processors, codenamed Panther Lake, aim to deliver improved performance and efficiency, according to the manufacturer. We tested the latest top model with the Core Ultra X9 388H to see what the new generation truly offers in terms of performance and efficiency. Update: Additional benchmarks of the Core Ultra X7 and AMD Strix Halo
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 14", 1.7 kg
Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407 convertible review - Intel Panther Lake is a game-changer

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407 convertible review - Intel Panther Lake is a game-changer

Asus has redesigned its dual-screen ZenBook Duo convertible for 2026, making it better in multiple respects. These include the new Intel Panther Lake processor with more efficient CPU cores and a so much faster iGPU that can just about make the GeForce RTX 4050 irrelevant. Update: Memory latency & additional gaming benchmarks
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 14", 1.7 kg

Dell XPS 14 Core Ultra X7 358H: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.4 kg
   » Dell XPS 14 Arc B390 vs. GeForce RTX 4050: 3DMark comparisons don't tell the whole story

   » Be sure to read the Dell XPS 14 service manual before opening up the 2026 model

   » 2026 Dell XPS 14 fixes some of the biggest complaints about the series

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
   » Asus' new Zenbook Duo UX8407 is easily the best dual-screen convertible

Asus ExpertBook Ultra B9406CAA: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.1 kg
   » Core Ultra X7 358H vs. Core Ultra 7 255H: Panther Lake throttles less and performs more consistently

   » Arc B390 vs. Radeon 8060S: Two very different GPUs for the same 14-inch screen size

   » Asus ExpertBook Ultra is as fast as many entry-level gaming laptops while being half the size

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
   » No chance for AMD: Intel Panther Lake Core Ultra X9 388H trounces AMD Strix Halo at low power signaling handheld gaming domination in 2026

Samsung Galaxy Book6 Pro NP960XJG-KG6DE: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.6 kg
   » Samsung Galaxy Book6 Series Hands-On: All models, prices, and launch date

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
Google Logo Add as a preferred
source on Google

» Comparison of GPUs
Detailed list of all laptop GPUs sorted by class and performance.

» Benchmark List
Sort and restrict laptop GPUs based on performance in synthetic benchmarks.

» Notebook Gaming List
Playable games for each graphics card and their average FPS results.

Class 1

Class 2

Radeon PRO W6600M *

Class 3

Intel Graphics 2 Xe3
UHD Graphics 750

Class 4

* Approximate position of the graphics adapter

Klaus Hinum (Update: 2026-02-18)