Arc Pro B390 vs Radeon RX 560
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 560 with Arc Pro B390, including specs and performance data.
Pro B390 outperforms RX 560 by a whopping 161% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 539 | 272 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.48 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.03 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Xe3-LPG (2026) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 21 | Panther Lake |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 April 2017 (9 years ago) | 27 January 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 1024 | 1536 |
| Core clock speed | 1175 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1275 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 81.60 | 120.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.611 TFLOPS | 7.68 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 24 |
| TMUs | 64 | 48 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 12 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 16 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | IGP |
| Length | 170 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | no 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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | Portable Device Dependent |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.9 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.4 |
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.
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.
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 HD | 35
−157%
| 90−95
+157%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.83 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.92 | 23.24 |
| Recency | 18 April 2017 | 27 January 2026 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 80 Watt |
RX 560 has 7% lower power consumption.
Arc Pro B390, on the other hand, has a 161% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 367% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc Pro B390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 560 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 560 is a desktop graphics card while Arc Pro 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.
