Arc B390 vs Radeon Pro SSG

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro SSG with Arc B390, including specs and performance data.

Pro SSG
2016, $9,999
4 GB HBM, 260 Watt
26.39
+22.6%

Pro SSG outperforms B390 by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking248300
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.50no data
Power efficiency7.8320.77
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Xe3-LPG (2026)
GPU code nameFijiPanther Lake
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date26 July 2016 (10 years ago)27 January 2026 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$9,999 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores40961536
Core clock speed1000 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz2500 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)260 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate268.8120.0
Floating-point processing power8.602 TFLOPS7.68 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs25648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L1 Cache1 MB768 KB
L2 Cache4 MB16 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeHBMSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width4096 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed500 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.2Portable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.9
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.2.1701.4

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Pro SSG 26.39
+22.6%
Arc B390 21.53

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Pro SSG 10971
+22.6%
Samples: 6
Arc B390 8949
Samples: 374

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD65−70
+14%
57
−14%
1440p40−45
+11.1%
36
−11.1%
4K27−30
+12.5%
24
−12.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p153.83no data
1440p249.98no data
4K370.33no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 87
+0%
87
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 73
+0%
73
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 107
+0%
107
+0%
Valorant 149
+0%
149
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 73
+0%
73
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 41
+0%
41
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 31
+0%
31
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 96
+0%
96
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Palworld 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45
+0%
45
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how Pro SSG and Arc B390 compete in popular games:

  • Pro SSG is 14% faster in 1080p
  • Pro SSG is 11% faster in 1440p
  • Pro SSG is 13% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.39 21.53
Recency 26 July 2016 27 January 2026
Chip lithography 28 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 260 Watt 80 Watt

Pro SSG has a 23% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc B390, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 833% more advanced lithography process, and 225% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro SSG is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc B390 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro SSG is a workstation graphics card while Arc B390 is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


1.9 3944 votes

Rate Radeon Pro SSG on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 25 votes

Rate Arc B390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro SSG or Arc B390, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.