Saturday, January 10th 2026

Intel Core Ultra X9 388H "Panther Lake" iGPU Doubles AMD "Strix Point" Performance in Cyberpunk 2077

Intel's "Panther Lake" chips, built on the 18A node, debuted at CES 2026, featuring Arc B390 integrated graphics. This launch shows that Intel is now commited to delivering some of the best-in-class iGPU performance. Digital Foundry has reported impressive performance claims from Intel. In Cyberpunk 2077, at 1080p resolution with the game set to "Ultra" and with ray-traced shadows and reflections enabled, Intel's top-tier Core Ultra X9 388H SKU achieves 28 FPS. While this may not seem remarkable at first glance, under the same settings, AMD's "Strix Point" Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 with Radeon 890M graphics manages only 14 FPS. This suggests that the "Panther Lake" chip performs twice as fast in early game results. In Intel's own testing, the "Panther Lake" chip is 73% faster with upscaling technologies and 82% faster at native resolution compared to AMD's "Strix Point," indicating an average across multiple titles. This also means there are instances where the Arc B390 outputs 100% more frames compared to the Radeon 890M.

Regarding desktop GPU performance, Intel is now comparable to the AMD Radeon RX 6600 discrete GPU, which scored 27 FPS in the same Cyberpunk 2077 game settings. Intel is collaborating with developers to integrate its latest XeSS3 multi-frame generation upscaling technology into numerous titles from the start. Cyberpunk 2077 is supported from day one, resulting in about a 3x increase in frame rates compared to XeSS2. In comparison to NVIDIA, Intel also claims to surpass NVIDIA's DLSS with the RTX 4050, particularly since XeSS3 supports multi-frame generation, which the RTX 4050 does not.
Source: Digital Foundry
Add your own comment

98 Comments on Intel Core Ultra X9 388H "Panther Lake" iGPU Doubles AMD "Strix Point" Performance in Cyberpunk 2077

#1
ONEoo7
From unplayable to movie like. Huge improvement intel. Gonna upgrade in 2036 at the pace you guys innovate.
Posted on Reply
#2
windwhirl
Hm. Not bad.

A pity they didn't compare against the actual top-tier chip from AMD, which is the 395
Posted on Reply
#3
melkor_unlimited
Performance in a League of its own
Sure.
Between 3 years old 890M and 2 years old 8040S.
Posted on Reply
#4
cfenton
windwhirlHm. Not bad.

A pity they didn't compare against the actual top-tier chip from AMD, which is the 395
While that would be interesting, I'm sure the 395 is still significantly faster, but it's also going to use much more power and probably cost a lot more. Only two laptops ended up using the 395 (a third might still come out) and they were both very expensive. The 370 is much more common and probably closer in price to the 388H.

If I were to criticize this benchmark I'd argue that using Cyberpunk with RT disadvantages AMD since RDNA 3 is bad at RT. It's still useful data since more and more games are using RT, but I wouldn't expect such dramatic results in most games.
Posted on Reply
#5
Redwoodz
I seem to remember other Intel gpu's already released that scored well at ray-tracing, but the raster was still meh compared to AMD & Nvidia.
Posted on Reply
#6
Darmok N Jalad
It sounds good an all, but who's going to run games at those settings and actually play at 28FPS? Makes me suspect that once you turn things down to playable settings, the RX6600 blows away the iGPUs and the 2 iGPUs start feeling more equal. I also have serious doubts about Forbidden West at 1080 at 52fps, at least with it not looking ugly and having some really hard dips in busy scenes. I guess when actual reviews come around, we'll see.
Posted on Reply
#7
hsew
melkor_unlimitedSure.
Between 3 years old 890M and 2 years old 8040S.
AMD just refeshed Strix Point with Gorgon Point (CPU clock speed improvement, same 3yrs old GPU), and there really aren't much if any 8040S devices on the market.

Face it, Intel is taking the lead in iGPUs. Strix Halo is too expensive to ever grab any meaningful marketshare (I've complained about the pricing on it forever now). Panther Lake is going to beat the pants off of Gorgon Point if Intel can be price-competitive, plain and simple.
Posted on Reply
#8
Darmok N Jalad
hsewAMD just refeshed Strix Point with Gorgon Point (CPU clock speed improvement, same 3yrs old GPU), and there really aren't much if any 8040S devices on the market.

Face it, Intel is taking the lead in iGPUs. Strix Halo is too expensive to ever grab any meaningful marketshare (I've complained about the pricing on it forever now). Panther Lake is going to beat the pants off of Gorgon Point if Intel can be price-competitive, plain and simple.
Intel is trying to get share back where it can. Intel has had a long working relationship with OEMs on mobile solutions, and it’s one place they can still show some market leadership. Their desktop and server CPUs aren’t the best anymore, and their dGPU offerings are also-rans. The problem in this situation is that having the best iGPU on a laptop will only win them so much. Serious mobile gamers are likely to go with a dGPU laptop, so really the best design win for gamers they can get right now with this chip is maybe handhelds. And maybe that’s good enough for now.
Posted on Reply
#9
kondamin
hsewAMD just refeshed Strix Point with Gorgon Point (CPU clock speed improvement, same 3yrs old GPU), and there really aren't much if any 8040S devices on the market.

Face it, Intel is taking the lead in iGPUs. Strix Halo is too expensive to ever grab any meaningful marketshare (I've complained about the pricing on it forever now). Panther Lake is going to beat the pants off of Gorgon Point if Intel can be price-competitive, plain and simple.
No real reason strix halo is as expensive as it is.
It’s sizeable but not that big.

They can and probably will bring prices down when it looks like intel is starting to eat their cake
Posted on Reply
#10
RejZoR
Why is frametime so much higher with higher framerate in the first image? That doesn't make sense. Frametime drops with increased framerate. Yet one with lowest framerate also has the lowest frametimes...
Posted on Reply
#11
Hecate91
kondaminNo real reason strix halo is as expensive as it is.
It’s sizeable but not that big.

They can and probably will bring prices down when it looks like intel is starting to eat their cake
Strix Halo has 2 chiplet dies very close to a large iGPU, along with ram near the CPU. A 308 mm² SoC is quite large.
The closest thing Intel had was Lunar Lake, which was probably too expensive to manufacture.
It'll be interesting to see some real benchmarks with more than a single game, Intel GPU's usually do well with RT, but their drivers and raster performance has been very hit or miss.
Posted on Reply
#12
FoulOnWhite
Been reading about this. it is pretty good indeed. Maybe they are really on to something here.
Posted on Reply
#13
kondamin
Hecate91Strix Halo has 2 chiplet dies very close to a large iGPU, along with ram near the CPU. A 308 mm² SoC is quite large.
The closest thing Intel had was Lunar Lake, which was probably too expensive to manufacture.
It'll be interesting to see some real benchmarks with more than a single game, Intel GPU's usually do well with RT, but their drivers and raster performance has been very hit or miss.
Strix halo is just lpddr5, the platform can theoretically take a lot of ram but will work perfectly fine with 32 or 64
It’s also on 4nm not 3nm like lunarlake
And the packaging is cheaper for amd.

It’s more expensive but it’s not this can only sit in 2000 usd laptops
Posted on Reply
#14
hsew
kondaminNo real reason strix halo is as expensive as it is.
It’s sizeable but not that big.

They can and probably will bring prices down when it looks like intel is starting to eat their cake
Strix Halo is not easy to manufacture. And Intel definitely has a price and performance advantage from using Intel 18A.

AMD has not kept pace in iGPU. Intel was breathing down their neck for years before this breakthrough.
Posted on Reply
#15
kondamin
hsewStrix Halo is not easy to manufacture. And Intel definitely has a price and performance advantage from using Intel 18A.

AMD has not kept pace in iGPU. Intel was breathing down their neck for years before this breakthrough.
If the 5070 hadn’t performed as poorly as it does the 9070 would have cost sub 500, and that for a whole graphics card.
Not just the chip.

Amd is asking silly prices because they can not because 395 is so expensive to make, yes it’s more expensive than a 370 but not by anything that would make systems made with it more than 1000 extra
Posted on Reply
#16
AsRock
TPU addict
Think i will skip the 50% +\- fake frames thank you.

Find it odd that there was a push for cloud gaming and it failed then shit like FSR and DLS popped up.

Soon it be look cloud gaming is as good now and it will be all due to the delay. Lets face it you play a multiplayer game it can be 80ms +\- delay and FSR and DLLS.
Posted on Reply
#17
TheinsanegamerN
AsRockThink i will skip the 50% +\- fake frames thank you.

Find it odd that there was a push for cloud gaming and it failed then shit like FSR and DLS popped up.

Soon it be look cloud gaming is as good now and it will be all due to the delay. Lets face it you play a multiplayer game it can be 80ms +\- delay and FSR and DLLS.
No it wont. The cloud "dream" has been right around the corner for going on 20 years now. The frame delay from FG is already a huge issue in games like Battlefield, now add the 50+MS delay from cloud streaming and you have a truthfully awful experience. And that's best case, cloud gaming is just an atrocious experience overall.
kondaminIf the 5070 hadn’t performed as poorly as it does the 9070 would have cost sub 500, and that for a whole graphics card.
Not just the chip.

Amd is asking silly prices because they can not because 395 is so expensive to make, yes it’s more expensive than a 370 but not by anything that would make systems made with it more than 1000 extra
Agreed. CPU margins are huge compared to GPUs, and Strix Halo is overpriced AF and has been since launch.
Posted on Reply
#18
hsew
kondaminAmd is asking silly prices because they can not because 395 is so expensive to make, yes it’s more expensive than a 370 but not by anything that would make systems made with it more than 1000 extra
I'm not sure AMD would be willing or even able to make it Strix Halo price-competitive with Panther Lake. Even if they did, how would it perform at the significantly lower wattages Panther Lake is targeting?
Posted on Reply
#19
Deorc Mearh
I would like to see Panther Lake cpus bench rather than only their iGPU ones
Posted on Reply
#20
hsew
TheinsanegamerNCPU margins are huge compared to GPUs, and Strix Halo is overpriced AF and has been since launch.
Even considering the chiplet system AMD is using, APUs and other dies can be significantly larger than CPU chiplets.

It's no secret that Strix Halo doesn't offer much if any advantage over a mobile 5060 in gaming, yet for some reason AMD insist on charging such a premium for it. I just don't think being able to run larger LLMs (poorly too) justifies such a significant increase in price, and I get the feeling AMD would rather have positioned Strix Halo to compete with gaming laptops if they had had the option of doing so. But they didn't, and most likely that comes down to AMD knowing they couldn't have manufactured Strix Halo cheaply enough to properly position it as a competitive mainstream product, so they sought to market it as an expensive niche instead.

At the end of the day, people need to realize Intel has become a force to be reckoned with in the GPU arena, and that AMD has been slacking in that same department. No, they aren't as bad as Intel was after SandyBridge, but they've seriously underestimated Intel in this space and they're about to pay the price for it.
Posted on Reply
#21
kondamin
hsewI'm not sure AMD would be willing or even able to make it Strix Halo price-competitive with Panther Lake. Even if they did, how would it perform at the significantly lower wattages Panther Lake is targeting?
They just need to be price competitive, it’s always going to be cheaper than something with a dgpu and yes it will use more power than the ultra mobile intel chip but it’s also far cheaper to,produce.

It’s an ok gaming solution for an ok price product, but they refuse to sell it as such
Posted on Reply
#22
DarkDreams
RejZoRWhy is frametime so much higher with higher framerate in the first image? That doesn't make sense. Frametime drops with increased framerate. Yet one with lowest framerate also has the lowest frametimes...
It isn't. They just decided to flip the graph for some reason. If you check, 0 is at the top and 100 at the bottom. I guess they wanted to avoid showing a "lower" graph on the better results :kookoo:
Posted on Reply
#23
cinemaware
TheinsanegamerNThe frame delay from FG is already a huge issue in games like Battlefield,
No, it isn't. Nobody forces you to switch FG on in a competitive shooter. And if you play SP, it's just fine if your base fps is sufficient.
Posted on Reply
#24
The Carnage
RejZoRWhy is frametime so much higher with higher framerate in the first image? That doesn't make sense. Frametime drops with increased framerate. Yet one with lowest framerate also has the lowest frametimes...
The graph min is on top and max on bottom
Posted on Reply
#25
TheinsanegamerN
cinemawareNo, it isn't.
Yes, it is. The latency from FG on multiplayer makes the game an absolute mess to play.

Playing any any sort of multiplayer game on cloud streaming is a one way pain train.
cinemawareNobody forces you to switch FG on in a competitive shooter. And if you play SP, it's just fine if your base fps is sufficient.
Never said it was forced on you. I dont know where people get the confidence to build arguments on things people didnt say. Reeding comprehension r hrd.
hsewEven considering the chiplet system AMD is using, APUs and other dies can be significantly larger than CPU chiplets.

It's no secret that Strix Halo doesn't offer much if any advantage over a mobile 5060 in gaming, yet for some reason AMD insist on charging such a premium for it. I just don't think being able to run larger LLMs (poorly too) justifies such a significant increase in price, and I get the feeling AMD would rather have positioned Strix Halo to compete with gaming laptops if they had had the option of doing so. But they didn't, and most likely that comes down to AMD knowing they couldn't have manufactured Strix Halo cheaply enough to properly position it as a competitive mainstream product, so they sought to market it as an expensive niche instead.
It's the old chestnut of the market determining the price. If they have no issue selling them at such an elevated price, then that is the appropriate price.

Sucks for us but they'd have to be genuinely stupid to cut the price in half for no reason.
hsewAt the end of the day, people need to realize Intel has become a force to be reckoned with in the GPU arena, and that AMD has been slacking in that same department. No, they aren't as bad as Intel was after SandyBridge, but they've seriously underestimated Intel in this space and they're about to pay the price for it.
:roll::laugh::roll:

The company with 0% dGPU marketshare is a "force to be reckoned with"? Really? You cant be serious!

So long as intel cant make a dent in sales and has fantastic 1-2 year driver support for their xe iGPUs, there is no way in hell that AMD will be paying any sort of price.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 13th, 2026 21:36 CST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts