Arc 140T vs. Radeon 890M benchmarks: Both a win and a lose for Intel

[Redaktion]

Our first benchmarks are in for Intel's Arrow Lake Arc 140T iGPU and they don't look too bad against the competing Radeon 890M depending on your point of view.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Arc-140T-vs-Radeon-890M-benchmarks-Both-a-win-and-a-lose-for-Intel.979421.0.html

[Istvan]

The power graph shows the exact opposite of what the article text says, with the AMD system using 50W vs the Intel one using 70W.

Which one is correct ?

[chris@amd]

49.2W for S16 890m in cyberpunk vs 68.8W for msi with 140T, what's wrong with author's inference of the power graph ?!

[Hotz]

Because:

1) the graph shows that Intel Arc 140T (70W) requires more power than the AMD Radeon 890m (50W)

2) the text says that "power consumption as a Radeon 890M laptop would demand almost 45 percent more power than an Arc 140T laptop"


-> Thus the article contradicts itself

[DantePierttyr]

Power Consumption varies greatly depending on the laptop and thermal management implemented.

AMD will win most of the time if we level both below 30w, the 890M is the superior solution with better driver support.

[GeorgeS]

Power Consumption varies greatly depending on the laptop and thermal management implemented.

AMD will win most of the time if we level both below 30w, the 890M is the superior solution with better driver support.

Team Blue will almost always be playing 'catch up' with their driver support.

While Intel's hardware MAY APPEAR competitive in generic benchmarks, the real test is with a wide selection of applications (IE: in this case Games) in which Intel will almost always fall short.

[PHVM_BR]

The power consumption graph shows the ZenBook S16 representing the 890m and therefore the consumption is lower.

It turns out that the graphics performance of the ZenBook S16 is the lowest among the 890m tested because the Ryzen in this laptop works limited to 28-33W and falls below both 140T tested.