Arc B390 vs Radeon RX Vega M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking377not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency80.44no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Xe3-LPG (2026)
GPU code nameVegaPanther Lake
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 February 2018 (8 years ago)27 January 2026 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores5121536
Core clock speed720 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHz2500 MHz
Number of transistors4,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate38.08120.0
Floating-point processing powerno data7.68 TFLOPS
ROPs824
TMUs3248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L1 Cacheno data768 KB
L2 Cacheno data16 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).

InterfaceIGPIGP
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memoryno data+

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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.9
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan-1.4

Synthetic benchmarks

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



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.

RX Vega M 6554
Samples: 406
Arc B390 9075
+38.5%
Samples: 63

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 February 2018 27 January 2026
Chip lithography 14 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 80 Watt

RX Vega M has 433.3% lower power consumption.

Arc B390, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega M and Arc B390. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M is a desktop 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.


1.7 9 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

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 RX Vega M or Arc B390, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.