Intel’s Arc A380 seems to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Whether and how quickly she can take off her costume is questionable.
Intel’s first real gamer graphics cards since the i740 and i752 respectively in the late 1990s are now long overdue. Actually, they should appear at the beginning of this year, after several postponements, a broad-based release seems to be planned for the coming summer months.
A model from the Arc Alchemist series is actually already on the market. At least in China. There you can buy Intel’s Arc A380 for the equivalent of around 150 dollars including Europe sales tax.
opinion
Avoid Intel’s new graphics cards for the time being
Arc A380 vs GTX 1650 and RX 6400
Arc A380 is most likely the smallest model in the Alchemist series for the desktop. This is underscored by a report by colleagues from Wccftechwhich includes official specifications including benchmarks: According to this, Intel positions the Arc A380 against Nvidia’s Geforce GTX 1650 and AMD’s Radeon RX 6400.
So far, so understandable. After all, Intel is a newcomer to the market for dedicated desktop graphics cards. However, if you compare the official benchmarks with independent results from synthetic benchmarks such as 3DMark Time Spy, you will see a huge discrepancy between theoretical performance and what is important in practice. A wolf in sheep’s clothing?
(Bildquelle: Shenmedounengce)
The data from 3DMark Time Spy shows that the basic computing power of Arc A380 not only outperforms both the GTX 1650 and the RX 6400 by more than 40 percent, but also rakes in the RX 6500 XT (up 8.3 percent). However, the RTX 3050 is quite a bit missing – 21 percent, to be precise.
It looks very different in Intel’s official benchmarks: Arc A380 can rarely hold its own against GTX 1650 and RX 6400. On average, she even performs a whole lot worse – see for yourself:
Where do the differences come from?
It seems as if Intel has primarily optimized the graphics cards and graphics drivers with regard to synthetic benchmarks. This makes sense insofar as the manufacturer can use standardized programs such as 3DMark to assess the performance of its graphics cards better than is possible with games that are subject to possible patches. The synthetic benchmarks show the fundamental potential of the architecture.
opinion
I had high hopes, now I fear a flop
The gaming benchmarks, on the other hand, show the current status of the graphics driver. And here Intel is obviously lagging behind both Nvidia and AMD by a long way. Because although Intel has already gained a lot of experience with graphics chips integrated in processors, dedicated game graphics cards for desktop PCs are another house number.
So the question is how long it will take Intel to catch up. There is no answer at the moment, only the months after the launch of the Arc Alchemist series can show that. It is quite conceivable that Intel can make very big leaps, especially at the beginning. At the same time, setbacks cannot be ruled out, for example when it comes to the stability of the driver with regard to crashes and freezes. So we are excited!
how do you see it? Do hope or worries prevail? Can Intel close the gap to Nvidia and AMD faster than expected, or do you expect it to take years? Write it to us in the comments!
.jpg?width=1200&height=630&fit=crop&enable=upscale&auto=webp)
.jpg/BROK/thumbnail/1600x900/format/jpg/quality/80/overwatch_2_junker_queen-(1).jpg)