Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU

Intel Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU

英特尔Arc B390(或Arc Pro B390)是英特尔Panther Lake SoC系列中功能最强大的集成图形单元,提供12个Xe3内核。这相当于 96 个 CU 和 1,536 个 ALU。

性能表现

在 3DMarkSteel Nomad 等合成基准测试中,Arc B390 达到了 RTX 2060 笔记本电脑 GPU 的水平的水平,但仍明显落后于现代 RTX 4050 笔记本电脑 GPU.不过,在我们的游戏基准测试中,B390 在相关设置下仍明显落后于 2060 Mobile。快速 AMD Radeon 8050S(Strix Halo)也明显更快。较旧的 英特尔 Arc 140T(箭湖)明显落后(如在游戏中落后 75%)。

此外,性能在很大程度上取决于散热和保证的 TDP 限制。不过,即使在要求苛刻的游戏中,如《Anno 117》或《The Outer Worlds 2》,其性能也足以在低设置下达到可玩帧率。

功能特点

新的媒体引擎现在支持 AV1 编解码、VVC 解码、AVC 10 位和 eDP 1.5。iGPU 通过双通道内存控制器支持快速 LPDDR5-9600(最大 96 GB)或 DDR5-7200(最大 128 GB)。

芯片由台积电采用现代 N3E 工艺制造。

Arc Xe3 Series

Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU 96 @ 2.5 GHz
Arc B370 Panther Lake iGPU 80 @ 2.4 GHz
Intel Graphics 4 Xe3 PTL 32 @ 2.5 GHz
Intel Graphics 2 Xe3 PTL 16
CodenamePanther Lake iGPU
iGPUIntegrated Graphics
Pipelines96 - unified
Raytracing Cores12
Core Speed2500 (Boost) MHz
AI GPU122 TOPS INT8
CacheL1: 768 KB, L2: 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 X9 378H16 x 1600 MHz, 25 W? MHz2500 MHz
Intel Core Ultra X7 368H16 x 1600 MHz, 25 W? MHz2500 MHz
min. - max.? MHz2300 - 2500 MHz

Benchmarks

Performance Rating - 3DMark 11 + Fire Strike + Time Spy
7.4 pt (22%)
AMD Radeon HD 8180
0.0639 -99%
...
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
6 -19%
6.46 -13%
6.47 -13%
6.5 -13%
6.53 -12%
6.54 -12%
6.57 -12%
7.2 -3%
7.35 -1%
Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU
7.44
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
7.51 1%
7.6 2%
7.64 3%
7.78 5%
8.02 8%
NVIDIA Quadro P5200
8.14 9%
8.21 10%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
8.72 17%
8.99 21%
...
22.4 201%
max:
33.3 348%
0%
100%
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Speed Way Score
min: 791     avg: 944     median: 953 (6%)     max: 1040 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Steel Nomad
min: 1347     avg: 1551     median: 1573 (11%)     max: 1667 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Steel Nomad Light
min: 5562     avg: 5934     median: 5897 (13%)     max: 6338 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Wild Life Unlimited
45597 Points (23%)
3DMark - 3DMark Solar Bay
min: 25117     avg: 27254     median: 27638 (11%)     max: 30578 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score
min: 13235     avg: 13939     median: 14033 (21%)     max: 14605 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
min: 16244     avg: 16810     median: 16885 (16%)     max: 17498 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Graphics
min: 341014     avg: 369197     median: 369196 (41%)     max: 397379 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Score
min: 6414     avg: 7213     median: 7259 (19%)     max: 7807 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Graphics
min: 4567     avg: 6483     median: 6653 (14%)     max: 7190 Points
Intel UHD Graphics 600
107.5 -98%
...
5702 -12%
5830 -10%
5851 -10%
5869 -9%
5934 -8%
6050 -7%
6121 -6%
6206 -4%
NVIDIA Quadro P5200
6422 -1%
Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU
6483
6745 4%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
6764 4%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile
6867 6%
7129 10%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop)
7284 12%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
7432 15%
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q
7445 15%
7494 16%
7651 18%
...
NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell Generation Laptop
23277 259%
max:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090
44063 580%
0%
100%
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics
632405 Points (64%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Extreme Graphics
296292 Points (35%)
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score
min: 34003     avg: 42663     median: 44418.5 (42%)     max: 48108 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
min: 52256     avg: 72160     median: 74455 (18%)     max: 82808 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Night Raid
min: 47254     avg: 47393     median: 47254 (45%)     max: 47672 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Night Raid Graphics Score
min: 71605     avg: 72723     median: 72722.5 (28%)     max: 73840 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score
min: 18189     avg: 18515     median: 18505.5 (22%)     max: 19256 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU
min: 18261     avg: 18505     median: 18367 (14%)     max: 18864 Points
171.8 -99%
...
16289 -12%
16564 -10%
16970 -8%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop)
17028 -8%
17562 -5%
17690 -4%
17711 -4%
17889 -3%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
18037 -3%
Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU
18505
19016 3%
19109 3%
19467 5%
19881 7%
20096 9%
20096 9%
20464 11%
20506 11%
21459 16%
...
NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell Generation Laptop
68271 269%
max:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090
129772 601%
0%
100%
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total +
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total
66984 Points (19%)
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX +
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX
60674 Points (33%)
ATI Radeon HD 3200
62 -100%
...
51396 -15%
52230 -14%
52733 -13%
52917 -13%
53510 -12%
54830 -10%
58792 -3%
60089 -1%
60439 0%
Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU
60674
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop)
62557 3%
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
62862 4%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile
63088 4%
63137 4%
64680 7%
66003 9%
66376 9%
66735 10%
66766 10%
...
132443 118%
max:
173912 187%
0%
100%
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
44482 Points (49%)
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 500
133.4 -100%
...
35208 -21%
35662 -20%
36346 -18%
36878 -17%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile
37669 -15%
39066 -12%
AMD Radeon 660M
41139 -8%
43138 -3%
AMD Radeon 680M
44442 0%
Intel Arc B390 12 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU
44482
44877 1%
44915 1%
46269 4%
46696 5%
47870 8%
48758 10%
50821 14%
50971 15%
52117 17%
...
68868 55%
max:
87172 96%
0%
100%
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 +
3DMark 06
46797 Points (61%)
Unigine Valley 1.0 - Unigine Valley 1.0 DX
min: 47.9     avg: 50.7     median: 50.7 (15%)     max: 53.5 fps
SPECviewperf 12
specvp12 sw-03 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03
76.9 fps (19%)
specvp12 snx-02 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02
3.8 fps (1%)
specvp12 showcase-01 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01
50.3 fps (9%)
specvp12 mediacal-01 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01
37.3 fps (10%)
specvp12 energy-01 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01
0.7 fps (1%)
specvp12 creo-01 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01
45.5 fps (18%)
specvp12 catia-04 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04
87.2 fps (14%)
specvp12 3dsmax-05 +
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 3dsmax-05
103 fps (16%)
SPECviewperf 13 specvp13 sw-04 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 sw-04
86.5 fps (23%)
specvp13 snx-03 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 snx-03
6.9 fps (1%)
specvp13 showcase-02 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 showcase-02
49.6 fps (8%)
specvp13 medical-02 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 medical-02
48.8 fps (8%)
specvp13 maya-05 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 maya-05
132 fps (15%)
specvp13 energy-02 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 energy-02
11.6 fps (4%)
specvp13 creo-02 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 creo-02
78.9 fps (11%)
specvp13 catia-05 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 catia-05
129 fps (14%)
specvp13 3dsmax-06 +
SPECviewperf 13 - specvp13 3dsmax-06
101 fps (16%)
SPECviewperf 2020 specvp2020 snx-04 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 snx-04 1080p
7.2 fps (1%)
specvp2020 medical-03 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 medical-03 1080p
23.6 fps (7%)
specvp2020 maya-06 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 maya-06 1080p
179 fps (19%)
specvp2020 energy-03 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 energy-03 1080p
11.6 fps (2%)
specvp2020 creo-03 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 creo-03 1080p
48.8 fps (17%)
specvp2020 catia-06 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 catia-06 1080p
30.2 fps (15%)
specvp2020 3dsmax-07 1080p +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 3dsmax-07 1080p
38.6 fps (10%)
specvp2020 snx-04 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 snx-04 4k
7.1 fps (1%)
specvp2020 medical-03 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 medical-03 4k
9.5 fps (6%)
specvp2020 maya-06 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 maya-06 4k
69.4 fps (10%)
specvp2020 energy-03 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 energy-03 4k
7.7 fps (2%)
specvp2020 creo-03 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 creo-03 4k
28.9 fps (13%)
specvp2020 catia-06 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 catia-06 4k
19.5 fps (13%)
specvp2020 3dsmax-07 4k +
SPECviewperf 2020 - specvp2020 3dsmax-07 4k
26.9 fps (9%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) +
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
11538 points (8%)
Cinebench R11.5 Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit
131.4 fps (13%)
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 138.4     avg: 222.8     median: 228 (13%)     max: 264.54 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: 245.6     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 6.7 - Geekbench 6.7.1 GPU OpenCL
min: 53732     avg: 56241     median: 56493 (14%)     max: 58162 points
Geekbench 6.7 - Geekbench 6.7.1 GPU Vulkan
min: 49510     avg: 57555     median: 58963 (15%)     max: 62177 points
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit - LuxMark v2.0 Room GPU
1449 Samples/s (5%)
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit - LuxMark v2.0 Sala GPU
3930 Samples/s (7%)
ComputeMark v2.1 - ComputeMark v2.1 Result
10533 points (9%)
Power Consumption - Furmark Stress Test Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 42.4     avg: 58     median: 59.3 (8%)     max: 63.7 Watt
0510152025303540455055606570Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption 150cd *
min: 40.1     avg: 60     median: 60.4 (17%)     max: 76.3 Watt
05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 34     avg: 57.5     median: 59.5 (8%)     max: 75.3 Watt
05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Power Consumption - Power Efficiency - Cyberpunk 2077 ultra
min: 0.4542     avg: 0.7     median: 0.7 (3%)     max: 0.793 fps per Watt
Emissions Witcher 3 Fan Noise +
Emissions - Witcher 3 Fan Noise
36.2 dB(A) (52%)
- 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.

low 1920x1080
19.2 43.1 ~ 31 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
17.9 38.6 ~ 28 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
36  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
34.9  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
97 97 ~ 97 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
62 64 ~ 63 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
36 37 ~ 37 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
20 21 ~ 21 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
12  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
low TAA 1920x1080
76
War Thunder

War Thunder

2026
med. 1920x1080
165.4  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
122.9  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
36  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
22.8  fps    + Compare
4K 3840x2160
11.5  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Pragmata

Pragmata

2026
low 1920x1080
40.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
29.3 29.6 ~ 29 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
21.8 21.9 ~ 22 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
QHD 2560x1440
15.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
30.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
26.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
23.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
18.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
39.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
27.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
38.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
36.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
35.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
131  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
81  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
61  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
21  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
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.
low 1920x1080
40.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
32.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
26.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
F1 25

F1 25

2025
low 1920x1080
112.6 134.8 147.8 149.8 ~ 136 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
97.3 111.7 121 124.1 ~ 114 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
76.4 86.4 92 92.8 94.8 ~ 88 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Ultra High Preset 16xAF TAA 1920x1080
28
29.6
29.9
27.9
27.6
24.7
low 1920x1080
36.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
29.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
26.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
24.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
54.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
44.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
43.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
29  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
33 34 ~ 34 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
32 33 ~ 33 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
27 29 ~ 28 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
15 21 ~ 18 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
31.8 33.1 ~ 32 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
27.5 31 ~ 29 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
23.8 25.4 ~ 25 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
64.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
47  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
38.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
26.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
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.
Marvel Rivals

Marvel Rivals

2024
low 1920x1080
42  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
35  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
29  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Stalker 2

Stalker 2

2024
low 1920x1080
36.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
21.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
ultra 1920x1080
68.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
29  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
28.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
23.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
23.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
38.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
37.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
35.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080 cinem.
21.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080 cinem.
14.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
43 45 47 ~ 45 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
34 35 37 ~ 35 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
26 28 29 ~ 28 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
14 15 16 ~ 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
71
F1 24

F1 24

2024
low 1920x1080
131 136.5 141.8 142.7 144.9 145.2 145.9 146.3 160.3 ~ 144 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
122.2 130.3 131.9 132.2 134.3 135 135.3 135.3 147.7 ~ 134 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
92.6 100 100.7 101.1 101.4 103.4 104.3 104.3 104.7 109.6 ~ 102 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
32.2 35.6 36.2 36.2 36.5 36.8 37.4 38 38.4 38.6 ~ 37 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
23.8 25.2 25.4 ~ 25 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
ultra 1920x1080
57.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
58.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
49.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
42.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
36.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
ultra 1920x1080
81.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
32.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
31.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
29.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
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.
ultra 1920x1080
54.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
QHD 2560x1440
41.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
4K 3840x2160
17.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
65.3 68.6 70.5 74.2 75 77.2 77.7 78.7 80.4 85.6 ~ 75 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
49.3 55 56.2 59.7 60.1 62.3 63.1 63.2 63.9 65.4 68.6 ~ 61 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
43.2 46.1 46.9 49.7 51.9 53.8 53.8 54 56 57.8 ~ 51 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
27.2 33.2 35.6 36.5 39.6 40.9 41.2 44.8 44.8 44.9 45.5 46.7 47.2 47.7 48.7 50.6 ~ 42 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
14.3 24.7 28.3 28.9 ~ 24 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset (FSR off) 1280x720
110.6
94.4
121.4
116.2
106.5
102.2
Ray Tracing Ultra Preset (DLSS off) 1920x1080
20.2
16.1
21
18.6
30min Start Ultra Preset (FSR off) 1920x1080
40.1
39.1
34.2
31.4
26.1
46.3
40.6
43.9
46.3
46
33.2
46.1
42.3
38
low 1920x1080
63.8 64.3 66.2 68.2 69.2 69.4 71.4 72.2 72.3 ~ 69 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
47.5 51 52.2 52.3 55.4 58.5 60.8 61.3 62.3 ~ 56 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
42.7 44.3 45.7 47 49 52.6 54 54.3 55.6 ~ 49 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
39.4 42.3 44.2 44.6 44.6 48.7 49.5 50.1 51.7 53.4 53.5 54.3 ~ 48 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
84.3
97.2
89.2
92.7
Starfield

Starfield

2023
low 1920x1080
27.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
25.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
25.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
22.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
ultra 1920x1080
44.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
ultra 1920x1080
56.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
high 1920x1080
88  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
49  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
ultra 1920x1080
75.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Valorant

Valorant

2020
high 1920x1080
149  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
QHD 2560x1440
95.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
4K 3840x2160
45.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
ultra 1920x1080
87  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
ultra 1920x1080
51.3  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Control

Control

2019
low 1280x720
172.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
67.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
53.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
180  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
87  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
81  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
54 66 70 ~ 63 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
48  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Strange Brigade

Strange Brigade

2018
low 1280x720
304 318 334 335 356 359 365 374 384 388 400 ~ 356 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
118.7 119.4 121.9 122.5 130.2 130.5 132.7 136.6 137.5 138.6 141.2 ~ 130 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
98.5 99.6 103.3 103.3 103.4 104 105.5 107.6 110.8 114.9 116.7 ~ 106 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
80 88.5 89.7 90.6 91.9 95.1 96.8 99.4 99.5 101.3 101.4 ~ 94 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
50.3 51.8 55.9 56.1 57 58.4 58.5 59.7 61.1 61.7 62 62.3 ~ 58 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
44.5 45 45.4 45.5 45.9 46.4 47.1 47.5 47.6 50.3 51.4 52.4 ~ 47 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
37.5 38.2 38.3 38.8 39.7 40.3 41.2 41.4 41.7 41.8 42.2 44.5 ~ 40 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
107.2 114.6 123.5 124.3 129.8 131.1 134.5 134.8 134.8 139.9 ~ 127 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
60.7 69.6 72.6 73.7 73.9 75.2 76.1 76.4 79.7 83 ~ 74 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
37.8 49.2 50.3 52.3 52.8 53.4 54.1 54.5 55.4 56.2 ~ 52 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
33.8 38.7 39 41 43.1 ~ 39 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
108.3 110.8 112.9 119.8 119.8 122.1 123.7 123.7 129.5 135 137 154.5 ~ 125 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
78.8 79.5 84.5 88 91.6 92.6 92.8 95.4 98.4 99 102.3 114.4 ~ 93 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
99 100.2 100.3 103.2 103.5 104 104.3 106.4 107.5 107.6 109.8 112.3 ~ 105 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
86.8 96.9 97 100.5 101.5 101.5 102 102.5 103.8 105.4 111.8 111.8 ~ 102 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1024x768
294  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1366x768
198.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
106.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
46.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Additional Benchmarks
Medium Graphics & Postprocessing 1920x1080
123.4
GTA V

GTA V

2015
low 1024x768
170.5 174.7 175.9 176.7 177.6 179.4 181.8 182 ~ 177 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
164.7 165.1 169.3 171 171.2 173 176.1 176.9 ~ 171 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
88.3 97.9 98.2 99.6 99.7 103.3 103.7 108.8 111.9 113.8 ~ 103 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
39.1 39.2 40.9 43 43.3 43.4 43.7 44.2 45.1 45.2 45.3 ~ 43 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
165.2
172.7
165.3
160.6
170.7
Lowest Settings possible 1920x1080
175.2
172
170.7
180
171.8
166.1
177.3
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
007 First Light31283634.9
Forza Horizon 69763372112
War Thunder165.4122.93622.811.5
Pragmata40.1292215.9
Death Stranding 230.426.823.618.2
Crimson Desert39.227.7
Resident Evil Requiem38.436.335.3
Call of Duty Black Ops 7131816121
Anno 117: Pax Romana5842.930.417.712.3
ARC Raiders13158432920
The Outer Worlds 25243.633.417.9
Battlefield 66254.446.934.825
Borderlands 440.432.826.1
F1 2513611488
Doom: The Dark Ages36.529.326.624.7
The Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion Remastered54.944.243.729
Assassin's Creed Shadows3433281818
Civilization 7267154.298.869.8
Monster Hunter Wilds40.1322925
Kingdom Come Deliverance 264.14738.326.5
Indiana Jones and the Great Circle42.634.233.229.621.1
Marvel Rivals423529
Stalker 236.121.3
EA Sports FC 2568.5
Final Fantasy XVI2928.223.323.2
Space Marine 238.137.335.1
Star Wars Outlaws21.114.7
Black Myth: Wukong4535281511
F1 241441341023725
Helldivers 257.7
Ready or Not58.149.542.436.5
The Finals81.8
Alan Wake 232.531.129.1
Total War Pharaoh225150.3108.991.962
Counter-Strike 254.741.217.8
Cyberpunk 20777561514224
Baldur's Gate 36956494835
Starfield27.625.325.422.9
The Witcher 3 v444.8
Elden Ring56.4
Forza Horizon 58849
Death Stranding75.3
Valorant14995.945.1
Doom Eternal87
Red Dead Redemption 251.3
Control172.267.453.7
Shadow of the Tomb Raider18087816348
Strange Brigade3561301069471
Far Cry 514287797353
X-Plane 11.11584740
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark127745239
Dota 2 Reborn12593105102
The Witcher 3294198.8106.546.6
GTA V1771711034331
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps
3
20
5
14
9
18
9
7
11
17
12
2
15
15
9
11
6
4
2
1

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

v1.35
log 07. 11:31:14

#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 Tue, 07 Jul 2026 05:31:53 +0200 +0.004s ... 0.004s

#4 no comparison url found in template nbc.compare_page_1 needed +0.019s ... 0.023s

#5 no comparison url found in template nbc.compare_page_1 needed +0s ... 0.023s

#6 no comparison url found in template nbc.compare_page_1 needed +0s ... 0.023s

#7 composed specs +0s ... 0.023s

#8 did output specs +0s ... 0.023s

#9 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.023s

#10 getting avg benchmarks for device 13268 +0.037s ... 0.061s

#11 got single benchmarks 13268 +0.037s ... 0.098s

#12 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.098s

#13 min, max, avg, median took s +3.23s ... 3.327s

#14 before gaming benchmark output +0.001s ... 3.328s

#15 Got 718 rows for game benchmarks. +0.215s ... 3.542s

#16 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 3.542s

#17 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.031s ... 3.573s

#18 benchmarks composed for output. +0.698s ... 4.271s

#19 no comparison url found in template nbc.compare_page_1 needed +0.23s ... 4.501s

#20 return log +0s ... 4.501s

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

英特尔 Arc G3 Extreme 重塑掌机游戏体验——MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ 评测

英特尔 Arc G3 Extreme 重塑掌机游戏体验——MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ 评测

微星(MSI)的 Claw 8 EX AI+ 是首款搭载英特尔首款专用掌上型 SoC——Arc G3 Extreme 的设备,该芯片配备了性能强劲的 Arc B390 集成显卡。其性能达到了一个全新的高度,轻松超越了 AMD 的专用掌上型芯片 Z2 Extreme。
Intel Arc G3 Extreme, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 8", 786 g
惠普 OmniBook Ultra 14 Core Ultra X9 评测:全面焕新,比以往更胜一筹

惠普 OmniBook Ultra 14 Core Ultra X9 评测:全面焕新,比以往更胜一筹

重新设计的OmniBook Ultra 14 不仅解决了2024年原版机型在机身尺寸和显示屏方面受到的批评,还显著提升了图形性能。不过,新款键盘的评价则褒贬不一。
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 14", 1.3 kg
宏碁 Swift 16 AI 评测:高性能与出色散热的完美结合

宏碁 Swift 16 AI 评测:高性能与出色散热的完美结合

新款宏碁 Swift 16 AI 将英特尔的 Panther Lake 架构与鲜艳的 OLED 屏幕和超大触摸板完美结合。硬件安装在光滑的机箱中,并得益于出色的冷却系统。工作温度非常低。
Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 16", 1.4 kg
Prestige 16 AI+ C3MTG 评测:微星新标识看起来很时尚

Prestige 16 AI+ C3MTG 评测:微星新标识看起来很时尚

最新的 Prestige 16 为该系列带来了重大变化,包括英特尔 Panther Lake、所有配置的 OLED 以及全新的外观。不过,与去年的设计相比,一些关键功能有所缺失或减少。
Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 16", 1.6 kg
戴尔 XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H 评测:退出英伟达,加入英特尔 Arc B390

戴尔 XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H 评测:退出英伟达,加入英特尔 Arc B390

Core Ultra X7 XPS 16 配置比基本型号贵 400 美元,提供更多内存、更大存储空间和显著更高的性能,而无需提高风扇噪音、功耗或温度。
Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, Arc B390 Panther Lake iGPU, 16", 1.7 kg

Khadas Mind Pro: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 0.6 kg
  Review » 凯达斯 Mind Pro 评测:配备英特尔酷睿 Ultra X7 和 Arc 图形处理器的高端迷你电脑是 Khadas 生态系统的完美基础

MSI Prestige 14 Flip AI+ 2026: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.4 kg
  Review » 豹湖电池带来近 20 小时的续航时间--微星 Prestige 14 Flip AI+ 可折叠机型评测

Dell XPS 14 Core Ultra X7 358H: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.4 kg
  Review » 戴尔 XPS 14 2026 评测:搭载英特尔豹湖 X7,全面重生

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
  Review » 英特尔 Panther Lake Arc B390 性能和效率分析:英特尔新 iGPU 与 NvidiaGeForce RTX 4050 互有胜负

Asus ExpertBook Ultra B9406CAA: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.1 kg
  Review » 华硕 ExpertBook Ultra 评测:英特尔豹湖 X7 的精彩首秀

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
  Review » 华硕 ZenBook Duo UX8407 可折叠笔记本评测--英特尔豹湖改变游戏规则

  Review » 英特尔豹湖酷睿™ Ultra X9 388H 性能分析--效率超越 Arrow Lake,超越 Zen 5

Microsoft Surface Laptop 8 13.8, Core X7 368H: Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, 13.80", 1.4 kg
  External Review » Microsoft Surface Laptop 8 13.8, Core X7 368H - 评测与配置

MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ CG3EM: Intel Arc G3 Extreme, 8.00", 0.8 kg
  External Review » MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ CG3EM - 评测与配置

Lenovo ThinkPad X9-15p: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 15.30", 1.5 kg
  External Review » Lenovo ThinkPad X9-15p

Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2026: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.5 kg
  External Review » 小米红米笔记本 Pro 14 2026

Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.7 kg
  External Review » 戴尔 XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H

Acer Swift 16 AI SF16-71T-75YX: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.4 kg
  External Review » 碁宏 Swift 16 AI SF16-71T-75YX

HP OmniBook X 16 (2026): Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 2.1 kg
  External Review » HP OmniBook X 16 (2026)

Acer Swift Go 16 AI SFG16-171: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 16.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Acer Swift Go 16 AI SFG16-171

HP EliteBook X G2i 14 NG AI: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1 kg
  External Review » HP EliteBook X G2i 14 NG AI

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
  External Review » 华硕 ZenBook Duo UX8407AA

Acer Swift 16 AI SF16-71T: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 16.00", 1.6 kg
  External Review » 宏碁 Swift 16 AI SF16-71T

LG gram Pro AI (2026) 16Z90U: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.2 kg
  External Review » LG gram Pro AI (2026) 16Z90U

Asus ExpertBook Ultra B9406CAA: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.1 kg
  External Review » 华硕 ExpertBook Ultra B9406CAA

MSI Prestige 14 Flip AI+ 2026: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.4 kg
  External Review » 微星 Prestige 14 Flip AI+ 2026

Samsung Galaxy Book6 Pro NP960XJG-KG6DE: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.6 kg
  External Review » SamsungGalaxy Book6 Pro NP960XJG-KG6DE

MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ CG3EM: Intel Arc G3 Extreme, 8.00", 0.8 kg
   » MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ 评测结论——最快的游戏掌机

   » 搭载 Arc G3 Extreme 的 MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ 表现非常出色,但谁愿意为一款掌机花 1799 美元呢?

   » 在35瓦功耗下,英特尔的Arc G3 Extreme通常比AMD的Ryzen Z2 Extreme快50%以上

HP OmniBook Ultra 14 Core Ultra X9: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » 我们最喜欢惠普 OmniBook Ultra 14 的地方,并不是这台笔记本电脑本身,而是它的充电器

MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ CG3EM: Intel Arc G3 Extreme, 8.00", 0.8 kg
   » 微星听取了用户的批评意见,并对新款 MSI Claw 8 EX AI+ 的软件进行了优化

HP OmniBook Ultra 14 Core Ultra X9: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » 新款惠普 OmniBook Ultra 14 相比戴尔 XPS 14 拥有一个关键优势

   » 搭载 Core Ultra X9 处理器的 HP OmniBook Ultra 14 是一款令人惊喜的游戏利器

   » 最新款惠普 OmniBook Ultra 14 堪称 Spectre 系列的近乎完美的继任者

   » 首批跑分显示,Core Ultra X9 388H 的运行速度慢于 Core Ultra X7 386H

Acer Swift 16 AI SF16-71T: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 16.00", 1.6 kg
   » 宏碁 Swift 16 即使在压力下也能保持凉爽

Acer Swift 16 AI SF16-71T-75YX: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.4 kg
   » 宏碁 Swift 16 即使在压力下也能保持凉爽

MSI Prestige 16 AI C3MTG: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.6 kg
   » 微星Prestige 16 AI+的65瓦交流适配器会使充电速度遇到瓶颈

   » 微星威望 16 C3MTG 是目前市场上最好的 XPS 16 替代品之一

   » 2026 Prestige 16 在 1080p 超高画质下运行《赛博朋克 2077》的速度超过 45 FPS,而它甚至不是一台游戏笔记本电脑

   » 微星可能不想让你知道的 2026 Prestige 16 的所有变化

   » 微星 Prestige 16 AI+ C3MTG 在平衡模式下运行噪音明显降低,但有一个问题

Dell XPS 16 Core Ultra X7 358H: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.7 kg
   » 与最新的 XPS 16 相比,选择戴尔 16 Premium 的两大理由

   » 戴尔 XPS 16 酷睿 Ultra X7 比酷睿 Ultra 5 声音更大、更耗电

   » 戴尔 XPS 配备了比大多数其他笔记本电脑更多的电池充电选项

   » 戴尔 XPS 16 OLED 配置带来了一些有趣的优缺点

   » 避免选择新的 XPS 16 Core Ultra 7,而直接选择性能更优越的 Core Ultra X7

Khadas Mind Pro: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 0.6 kg
   » 卡达斯 Mind Pro 迷你电脑价格上涨:预购价格有效期至 3 月 27 日

   » 卡达斯 Mind Pro 迷你电脑评测:从办公电脑到配备GeForce RTX GPU 的游戏系统

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
   » 华硕新款 Zenbook Duo UX8407 堪称最佳双屏可折叠产品

Dell XPS 14 Core Ultra X7 358H: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.4 kg
   » 戴尔 XPS 14 Arc B390 与GeForce RTX 4050:3DMark 对比不能说明一切

   » 在打开 2026 型之前,请务必阅读戴尔 XPS 14 维修手册

   » 2026 戴尔 XPS 14 解决了该系列最令人不满的一些问题

Samsung Galaxy Book6 Pro NP960XJG-KG6DE: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 16.00", 1.6 kg
   » 三星Galaxy Book6 系列上手体验:所有型号、价格和上市日期

Asus ExpertBook Ultra B9406CAA: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.1 kg
   » Core Ultra X7 358H 与 Core Ultra 7 255H:Panther Lake 节流更少,性能更稳定

   » Arc B390 与 Radeon 8060S:相同的 14 英寸屏幕尺寸,两款截然不同的 GPU

Asus ZenBook Duo UX8407AA: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, 14.00", 1.7 kg
   » AMD 毫无胜算:英特尔豹湖酷睿 X9 388H 在低功耗下击败 AMD Strix Halo,预示 2026 年掌上游戏的霸主地位

Asus ExpertBook Ultra B9406CAA: Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, 14.00", 1.1 kg
   » 华硕 ExpertBook Ultra 的速度与许多入门级游戏笔记本电脑不相上下,体积却只有它们的一半

Google LogoAdd as a preferred source on Google
Mail Logo

» 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

GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile
RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Generation Laptop
M5 Max 32-Core GPU *
M1 Max 32-Core GPU *
M1 Max 24-Core GPU *
GeForce RTX 2070 Super Mobile
Radeon 8050S
Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
Radeon RX 5700M *
Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop)
GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile
M1 Pro 16-Core GPU *
Radeon PRO W6600M *
GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q
RTX PRO 1000 Blackwell Generation Laptop *
M1 Pro 14-Core GPU *
Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
Radeon 8040S *
Pro A60M *

Class 3

Pro A30M
Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon RX 5300M
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
Radeon 680M
T500 Laptop GPU
Arc 130T
Radeon Pro Vega 16
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
Radeon 660M
Xe MAX
Radeon Pro 560X
Radeon Pro 560
Quadro P620
Radeon RX 550X (Laptop)
Radeon Pro WX 3200 *
Radeon Pro 555X
Radeon Pro 555
Graphics 3-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) *
Graphics 2-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) *
Radeon 630
Quadro P520
Radeon 540X *
Vega 10
Vega 9
UHD Graphics 32EUs
UHD Graphics 750
Vega 7
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
Vega 8
UHD Graphics 730
Vega 6 *
UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) *
Radeon 610M *
Vega 6 *
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs *
Adreno 690 *
Adreno 685 *
Adreno 680 *

Class 4

* Approximate position of the graphics adapter

Klaus Hinum (Update: 2026-02-18)