Fusion 360 Compatibility Issues with Intel Arc GPU - Lunar Lake (Lenovo Laptop)

[Eder.CASTRO]

Hello Fusion 360 Community,

I am experiencing a persistent graphics compatibility issue while running Fusion 360 on my Lenovo laptop, which is equipped with an Intel Arc 140V GPU (Lunar Lake).

My system is currently using the Intel Arc graphics driver version 32.0.101.6881, obtained directly from Lenovo’s official support website. I have also tested newer Intel Arc driver releases (including 32.0.101.8132 and 32.0.101.8247), but unfortunately the issue has not been resolved.

What makes this particularly frustrating is that I have seen Fusion 360 run smoothly on older entry-level laptops, such as Dell Latitude models with modest CPUs and integrated graphics, without any compatibility problems. By comparison, my newer hardware struggles to achieve stable performance.

For reference, I have attached a screenshot of the Graphics Diagnostic window from Fusion 360, which shows the current configuration.

I would like to ask:

• Is Autodesk aware of compatibility issues affecting Intel Arc GPUs?
• If so, are there ongoing efforts to improve support in future updates?

I have been a long-time fan of Fusion 360 and rely on it heavily for my projects, so I am very eager to find a solution that allows me to continue using it effectively on my current hardware.

Thank you in advance for any guidance or insights.

[lance.carocci]

Hi @Eder.CASTRO, sorry if I missed this in your post, but could you please describe the compatibility issue you are facing?

[Eder.CASTRO]

Hi @lance.carocci , thanks for following up. The compatibility issue I’m facing is that Fusion 360 becomes unstable when using my Lenovo laptop with the Intel Arc 140V GPU. Specifically:

• The viewport often freezes or lags when rotating or zooming models.
• Even with updated drivers (currently 32.0.101.8247 from Intel), the performance is inconsistent compared to older laptops I’ve used with integrated graphics.
• In the Graphics Diagnostics window, the GPU RAM is reported as only 128 MB (despite the Arc GPU having 18 GB shared memory available), and the GPU Driver Date field shows “Unknown.”

I’ve attached the Graphics Diagnostic screenshot to show my current configuration.

Could you confirm if this is a known limitation with Intel Arc GPUs, and if there are recommended settings or workarounds to improve stability?

Thanks again for your help.

[lance.carocci]

There aren't any known limitations with Arc graphics. 128MB is just the minimum reserved amount of dedicated memory - this metric tends to be more useful for dedicated graphics.

The driver date field is an unrelated issue.

You can try submitting a performance report by using the Performance Recorder under Help > Support and Diagnostics > Report Performance Issue.

[pcarrick59]

Hi Eder.Casto,

Did you resolve your issue? I am having similar problems too.

Toady I fired up my old laptop and compared the Fusion Graphic Diagnostic  

I noted that the graphics diagnostic on the new PC says 128MB, but i have a 18GB Vram installed on my PC. Whilst the Fusion graphic diagnostic on my old PC say's 2GB which is compatible with the PC graphic card.

 Why is it showing incorrect GPU status? Is this the problem? If so, then I need to find out how to force Fusion to see the 18GB Vram GPU.

Sorry to barge in on your thread, but I'm keen to get to the bottom of this issue and get back to designing...

Regards

Paul

[Eder.CASTRO]

Hi @pcarrick59 , thanks for jumping in — it’s very helpful to know you’re seeing the same behavior.

I haven’t resolved the issue yet. I’ve followed all the recommended steps (reinstalling drivers, updating to the latest Intel Arc release 32.0.101.8250, reinstalling Fusion 360, rebooting, and testing different graphics settings), but Fusion still reports only 128 MB GPU RAM in the Graphics Diagnostic window. On top of that, when opening Fusion’s own sample project (Sim Racing Steering Wheel), the software doesn’t seem to leverage the GPU properly, triggers instability, and displays the message: “Fusion is encountering performance issues. Click here to diagnose” in the lower corner.

For comparison, when I used my previous laptop with a Ryzen 9 AI 370HX and Radeon 890M GPU, Fusion detected the GPU correctly and performance was considerably better. The surprising part is that Intel’s new Lunar Lake drivers outperform this CPU in games (in my experience), which shows the hardware is capable — but Fusion (or Intel’s driver layer) doesn’t seem to be leveraging it properly. That makes me think this is a broader compatibility gap between Fusion 360 and Intel Arc 140V graphics.

Unfortunately, as I’m no longer a commercial user, I can’t report this directly through Autodesk’s support channels. But by sharing our experiences here, we can give the issue more visibility. At this point, it looks like Autodesk and/or Intel will need to make corrections so Fusion can properly recognize and utilize Arc GPUs.

Let’s keep this thread active — the more data points we provide, the better chance Autodesk will acknowledge and address it.

[pcarrick59]

Good morning Eder.Castro

Good to know I'm not the only one with this issue, although better it didn't exist of course. At least I can go back to Autodesk and ask a specific question. 

Paul.

[lance.carocci]

Have either of you submitted a performance recording yet? Please share the number of the report.

The 128MB value reflects the reserved memory for the GPU, not shared. Unless you have reserved 18GB of RAM to the GPU (such that it is not otherwise available to the OS), it will likely not report the correct value. In practice, the reported value can fluctuate for AMD integrated graphics, but tends to remain constant for Intel chipsets.

[pcarrick59]

Hi Lance,

Thank you for responding, I did submit a performance recording a week or so ago. TBH, I'm not sure if it was successful. I will have another go shortly.

So, are you saying that it not a problem that Fusion say's 128MB when the GPU is 18GB?

Paul.

[Eder.CASTRO]

Hi @lance.carocci , thanks for the clarification. Yes, I’ve also submitted a performance recording — the Report ID is 107260.

It’s worth noting this is the first time I’ve observed this problem. I’ve tested Fusion 360 on several other computers — including colleagues’ machines and even entry‑level consumer laptops with very modest graphics — and those systems were detected correctly without these issues.

Hopefully the performance recording helps highlight this gap. Please let me know if more details would be useful.

Eder

[lance.carocci]

I have another theory - could you please try forcing Fusion to Offline mode, and see if anything improves?

I happen to be investigating a case of some API retry logic interrupting the UI thread, which visually comes across as poor GPU performance. If nothing changes, that's still a useful data point.

[lance.carocci]

---

So, are you saying that it not a problem that Fusion say's 128MB when the GPU is 18GB?

Correct. This value is being reported to Fusion from the OS, and the OS says the GPU has 128MB of dedicated memory. It does not reflect the current, dynamic VRAM utilization.

If you were to watch Fusion's GPU memory usage in Task Manager (Details tab, with both Shared and Dedicated GPU Memory columns enabled) and a detailed model open, you will see far more than 128MB in use.

[lance.carocci]

@Eder.CASTRO (and @pcarrick59 if you see this too) for the missing driver date, can you please export a DxDiag report and attach it?

Note: The report includes the Windows username/path, which often defaults to a user's real name. Please scrub this from the report before uploading if you are concerned about sharing personally-identifiable information. Alternately, you can email it to me - the format is first name (dot) last name (at) autodesk (dot) com.

[pcarrick59]

Hi Lance,

I have emailed a DXdiag report.

Regards

Paul

[pcarrick59]

Hi Lance,

yes, I did try working offline when Fusion was beginning to slow, but it didn't make any difference at the time.  Although, I didn't try starting a new sketch while offline right from the beginning.

Paul

[LishuangLu]

@pcarrick59 @Eder.CASTRO , thanks for reporting! 

When you encounter slow performance on your side, please switch to the Performance preset via the bottom navigation toolbar → Graphics Preset → Performance.

Let us know whether the performance can be improved with such change. 

Thanks, 

Lisa

[Eder.CASTRO]

Hi @lance.carocci, @LishuangLu, @pcarrick59, just an update from my side.

I installed today the latest Intel Lunar Lake driver release (32.0.101.8331 WHQL Certified, 12/3/2025) with high hopes that the issue would be resolved. Unfortunately, Fusion still reports the GPU Driver Date as “Unknown” in the Graphics Diagnostic window.

Interestingly, after switching Fusion into Offline mode and then reverting back online, the message “Fusion is encountering performance issues” has not reappeared. I’m not sure why that change suppressed the warning, but it didn’t translate into any real performance improvement. In practice, working offline/online isn’t really feasible for team collaboration projects, which is one of Fusion’s biggest advantages.

Performance-wise, the viewport remains unstable, and using the Quality preset essentially kills usability even for a simple part, a cube, for example— the lag and freezes make it impractical to work with larger assemblies.

So while the new driver didn’t fix the recognition issue, the offline mode experiment and DxDiag report hopefully provide useful data points to help narrow down whether the problem is driver recognition or Fusion’s handling of Intel Arc GPUs.

Lastly, as requested, I’ve also generated a DxDiag report and sent it to you @lance.carocci by email.

Regards,

[lance.carocci]

Thanks @Eder.CASTRO, I've confirmed the driver date is a cosmetic issue on our end and should be fixed in a future major (as opposed to minor) update.

The Offline test was more to confirm that some of our web traffic isn't interrupting the UI (which often looks like low framerate if it happens repeatedly for milliseconds at a time). It sounds like that is not the case.

Would you be able to record the experience you are facing?

Broadly speaking, modern integrated graphics will be able to do most modeling, but depending on the complexity or size of your model, performance of the graphics canvas can still be impacted. Personally, on my UHD 620 graphics running 4k@60hz, I use a custom preset with all the details on High, but a navigational framerate threshold of 60 so that all detail disables briefly during canvas movement, then restores when stationary.

The biggest impact to framerate is generally going to be Anti-Aliasing followed by Ambient Occlusion, so you can try disabling those specifically if you like.

[pcarrick59]

Hi all, Happy New Year.

Lisa, I did make the change as you suggested before Christmas,  since then Fusion seems to be behaving. I've not used Fusion much since then to be honest, just a bit of editing, seems OK tho. 

Thank you for the help, fingers crossed that is the solution and Fusion behaves now.

[Eder.CASTRO]

Hi guys,

Just a quick update — after installing the January 26 Fusion 360 update, the error message and performance issues on my Intel Arc system are gone. Everything is running smoothly now. Thanks to the Autodesk team for the support and follow‑up @lance.carocci @LishuangLu.

—Eder