Review Intel Arc B580 review: The new $249 GPU champion has arrived

[Admin]

Intel's Arc B580 graphics card kicks off the next generation GPUs a month early, bringing significant architectural improvements and a budget-friendly price. Drivers are still a bit of a question mark, but the underlying hardware delivers strong performance and good features and an attractive price.

Intel Arc B580 review: The new $249 GPU champion has arrived : Read more

 

[Math Geek]

nicely done

looks like a good value. i'm in the market for my next card but seems like waiting a little bit to see what AMD does next is not too bad of an idea. i hate waiting to see what the next best thing is but this close it seems like prudent advice.

side note: it does look like you forgot to replace the place holders on the power consumption paragraph.

"On average, the B580 used xxxW at 1080p medium, xxxW at 1080p ultra, xxxW at 1440p, and xxxW at 4K. As you'd expect, power use typically increases at higher settings and resolutions."

 

[Jagar123]

I am happy to have competition in the market. I imagine next gen AMD and Nvidia cards will be stronger competitors but they might be priced poorly again. Price to performance is key here. We'll see in a month or so.

 

[shady28]

Great review, against relevant parts for this price class too 😀
Given that Steam shows the 3 most popular GPUs are the 3060 discrete, 4060 laptop, and 4060 discrete, Intel now has a GPU that competes in the largest part of the segment - and leads it in both value and performance.

Granted AMD and Nvidia are about to release new GPUs, but let's also note that the 5060 / 8600 aren't likely to show up until late 2025 or early 2026 if they follow their normal pattern.

 

[palladin9479]

Great review, I'm in the market for a SFF two slot low power card for a living room system. The APU can only do so much and I'm starting to hit walls with it lately so a lower power dGPU might be the only real answer.

 

[Gururu]

I guess it will come down to an availability issue. I doubt we will see superior cards by AMD or nVidia in this price bracket by end of Q1 2025. We will certainly see lots of benchmarks blowing these early battlemage offerings in January, but nothing ready for purchase. Later battlemage offerings are in my best guess going to be in the $400 range, likely beating 7800 and 4070, but again probably not until mid-late Q1. If AMD and nVidia drop anything crushing a 4090 you can bet it will be in the $700+ range. Is it fair to say that something beating the B580 readily available in April for $250 is fair competition now? I don't know. Maybe not if a normal consumer can actually get B580 silicon before Christmas.

 

[Eximo]

Great review, I'm in the market for a SFF two slot low power card for a living room system. The APU can only do so much and I'm starting to hit walls with it lately so a lower power dGPU might be the only real answer.

I would probably still lean towards an RTX 3050 6GB for that. B580 is still a little power hungry for the job.

I use an A380, and that isn't ideal either, since it still needs an 8-pin (at least that model). Though supposedly still only a 75W GPU.

 

[DS426]

Great review, Jarred! The elaboration on your thinking and updating of your test bench's hardware and software is appreciated.

It'll be some time before AMD and NVIDIA (green wants it written this way, by the way: http://http.download.nvidia.com/image_kit/LG_NVCorpBadge.pdf ... was curious as I noticed they have it written that way on their website) have new budget GPU's in this price class, so I myself wouldn't really recommend that a prospective owner waits. Of course, a lot of it also depends on if building new or upgrading (and upgrading from what). There's a huge user base at this price point, so I do imagine that Intel will get some market penetration for end users, not just prebuilds. This, particularly since day 1 drivers are already fairly stable overall and Intel now has the value leader at this price point; Intel didn't mess up this launch, whereas botched launches can tarnish audience sentiment of the product for months and years, if not permanently.

 

[King_V]

Definitely liking what I see here. And, glad to know that Intel is taking this very seriously. They're clearly not messing around.

 

[rluker5]

Transistor density pretty close to AMD.
Transistor density of 7600XT is 65.2 M/mm2 and B580 is 72.1 M/mm2 per Techpowerup. Sure B580 is on 5nm while 7600XT is on 6nm but that isn't that big a difference. Definitely moving in the right direction. And more importantly performance per mm2 is much closer to AMD. And performance per watt.

Catching up really fast.

 

[caseym54]

Probably flogging a dead horse here, but a 6-column table with 5 columns visible and a slider is truly lame.

 

[Pierce2623]

Strangely enough, my main takeaway from this review is that Nividia’s ray tracing isn’t nearly as miraculously performant as it’s made out to be. The 4060 is uncomfortably close to the 7600xt in most games while never more than about 25% ahead and the b580 seemingly just romps them both in ray tracing performance.

 

[Eximo]

RTX 4060 only has 24 RT cores.

7600XT has 54, so like a 2:1 compared to Nvidia (1 RT core per CU it looks like)

B580 has 20 RT cores, and it is about two years newer than the Nvidia architecture.

When Nvidia gets around to launching a contemporary Blackwell entry level card, likely to see more healthy competition.

I've not seen anything regarding RT improvements for AMDs next release. But that could also easily outpace Intel here.

It is encouraging that is relatively small GPU has that much performance though. A little smaller than the 7700/7800XT silicon. (around the same size as the 4070 die, quite a bit bigger than the 4060)

 

[thestryker]

The B580 seems to deliver on what Intel has claimed which is good to see. Ray Tracing performance per core has vastly improved and hopefully that's a sign for all of the forthcoming generation cards. If RT is to truly be the path forward improving its performance on the lower SKUs is most important. DX11 is clearly still going to be an issue, but with that and DX9 I think playable is acceptable simply due to the nature of many of those games under the hood.

With Xe3 already finalized hardware wise and coming with PTL watching what Intel does on the discrete side will be interesting. While I think there are huge benefits to yearly GPU hardware improvements this seems like it would be hard to maintain while making money on the discrete side. Hopefully at CES Intel will give an idea of what else we can expect from Battlemage.

I don't really think there's likely to be good competition in this price from AMD/NV at all. I do think both companies will likely offer faster cards around $300, but they've shown disdain for the $250 and below market after the 20 and 5000 series generations.

One note on transistors, which I heard Tom Peterson mention when he was on the HUB podcast, is that Intel is only counting active transistors. He suggested (he made it clear he does not know for sure) that perhaps AMD/NV count every transistor in their respective chips design. I think this is a question which would be worth asking AMD/NV if given the opportunity.

 

[Adzls]

Intel's Arc B580 graphics card kicks off the next generation GPUs a month early, bringing significant architectural improvements and a budget-friendly price. Drivers are still a bit of a question mark, but the underlying hardware delivers strong performance and good features and an attractive price.

Intel Arc B580 review: The new $249 GPU champion has arrived : Read more

I am at a bit of a loss. The review was great and I kept reading only to ask myself, where's the review tests for content creators?
I was looking forward to see tests on video encode comparisons and if AV1 quality/efficency had increased or if VVC encode is supported.

 

[Eximo]

I usually wait for Level 1 Tech for productivity review, and Linux in general.

Gamer first with most of the decent reporting outlets. I think Gamer's Nexus does some productivity performance as well.

 

[Sluggotg]

Great Review! I am really impressed with Intel's new card. I am buying one to play with. I am not sure but it does not look like I will be able to for a bit. I can see morons on Amazon who want up to $400 for one and New Egg is not taking preorders. I will see what happens tomorrow. I don't "Need" one but I will pick one up, when they become available. I will see tomorrow.

 

[Math Geek]

Great Review! I am really impressed with Intel's new card. I am buying one to play with. I am not sure but it does not look like I will be able to for a bit. I can see morons on Amazon who want up to $400 for one and New Egg is not taking preorders. I will see what happens tomorrow. I don't "Need" one but I will pick one up, when they become available. I will see tomorrow.

it'll be the normal thing for new releases. like always, just wait for the stock to normalize. if you're gonna pay $400 to a scalper, why not just buy a $400 gpu instead?? pretty sure you'll get more gpu power that way. but alas, the not so smart chunk of the population will pay it anyway.......

 

[shady28]

Great Review! I am really impressed with Intel's new card. I am buying one to play with. I am not sure but it does not look like I will be able to for a bit. I can see morons on Amazon who want up to $400 for one and New Egg is not taking preorders. I will see what happens tomorrow. I don't "Need" one but I will pick one up, when they become available. I will see tomorrow.

NewEgg is actually showing preorder for one that releases on 12/20.

All the other ones show sold out there.

Guess word gets around quick. I hope Intel has a bunch more to ship out and in the pipe. This looks to be a really hot product.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

NVIDIA (green wants it written this way, by the way: http://http.download.nvidia.com/image_kit/LG_NVCorpBadge.pdf ... was curious as I noticed they have it written that way on their website) have new budget GPU's in this price class, so I myself wouldn't really recommend that a prospective owner waits.

We have a style guide that basically says most company names that aren't acronymns get written with a single capital letter. So Nvidia and Asus, but AMD. Gigabyte and many other companies do all caps as well, and we as journalists think it looks ugle. 🤷‍♂️

As for waiting, there are rumors AMD will have a budget/mainstream part in January, or at least announce it. It might cost $300, sure, but if it's 30% faster than the 7600 XT? That would be worthwhile.

Strangely enough, my main takeaway from this review is that Nividia’s ray tracing isn’t nearly as miraculously performant as it’s made out to be. The 4060 is uncomfortably close to the 7600xt in most games while never more than about 25% ahead and the b580 seemingly just romps them both in ray tracing performance.

The use of RT in games is also an important factor. Even though I selected some heavier games, none (other than Minecraft) are full path tracing and so aren't hitting the RT as hard as possible. But RT is very overhyped in games still, IMO.

One note on transistors, which I heard Tom Peterson mention when he was on the HUB podcast, is that Intel is only counting active transistors. He suggested (he made it clear he does not know for sure) that perhaps AMD/NV count every transistor in their respective chips design. I think this is a question which would be worth asking AMD/NV if given the opportunity.

Yes, this is true. We don't know how AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Apple, etc. count transistors. There's no official way to do so. What we do know is that RTX 4060 isn't that far behind B560, despite being nearly two years old, and it has a far smaller die and uses 20~30 percent less power.

I am at a bit of a loss. The review was great and I kept reading only to ask myself, where's the review tests for content creators?

I was looking forward to see tests on video encode comparisons and if AV1 quality/efficency had increased or if VVC encode is supported.

Time constraints, sadly, but there rea professional tests showing transcoding, AI, 3D rendering, etc. on page six.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

Even though the performance is in the 4060 area, I think Intel blew it by the 12GB VRAM. While it is more than Nvidia offers, I think they should have put on 16GB like the A770, even if it did raise the price, because I don't foresee any nVidia users choosing a B580 over an RTX 4060 (price difference too small), and would have opened it up more to markets which perhaps are more VRAM limited, such as VR. You could say it would then put it into competition with the 4060 Ti, which is about 20% faster, but is also far more expensive.

 

[TCA_ChinChin]

Even though the performance is in the 4060 area, I think Intel blew it by the 12GB VRAM. While it is more than Nvidia offers, I think they should have put on 16GB like the A770, even if it did raise the price, because I don't foresee any nVidia users choosing a B580 over an RTX 4060 (price difference too small), and would have opened it up more to markets which perhaps are more VRAM limited, such as VR. You could say it would then put it into competition with the 4060 Ti, which is about 20% faster, but is also far more expensive.

I'd say that if Intel did that, they'd increase their own costs while failing to significantly increase their own sales since like you said, nVidia users won't care. Although I agree with the VR market, maybe it was considered too small a market to pursue with more VRAM.

 

[Pierce2623]

RTX 4060 only has 24 RT cores.

7600XT has 54, so like a 2:1 compared to Nvidia (1 RT core per CU it looks like)

B580 has 20 RT cores, and it is about two years newer than the Nvidia architecture.

When Nvidia gets around to launching a contemporary Blackwell entry level card, likely to see more healthy competition.

I've not seen anything regarding RT improvements for AMDs next release. But that could also easily outpace Intel here.

It is encouraging that is relatively small GPU has that much performance though. A little smaller than the 7700/7800XT silicon. (around the same size as the 4070 die, quite a bit bigger than the 4060)

AMD cards have the same number of ray accelerators as compute units don’t they? That would put it at 32. Yep I just checked and Nvidia matches the SM count just like AMD matches the CU count so it’s 24 to 32, NOT 24 to 54.


Regardless the “better” architecture is the one that gives the most performance per dollar. Period. Alchemist outperformed Ampere in ray tracing too.

 

[YSCCC]

Nicely done and a pleasant surprise and hope they can keep up with driver development in future to really make it a 3 player game.

Ironically enough is that they seems so great in C/P is basically purely due to the post COVID scalper level MSRP from both NVIDIA and AMD. And as Intel is using TSMC N5 node also it just proves that the Moore’s law is dead claim by some very wealthy CEO is kinda… just greed over fact..

 

[abufrejoval]

While everyone is so focussed on the bang per buck angle of the B580, I can't help looking at the bang per Watt or how the B580 compares to the RTX 4070, which is the tech equivalent.

I have a PNY dual fan verto 4070 which is pretty near the exact same size, dual slot, compact height and length and it has the same single 8 ping power connector.

It also features 192Bit wide VRAM at just around 500Gbyte/s bandwidth.

So using very similar hardware assets in power and hardware resources this two year old card consistently delivers about twice the performance when deploying its DLSS muscle while it also costs twice as much. Even in pure raster its way better, judging by the Phoronix results.

Twice the power at twice the price is equal value ratio at different load points.

Now, the B580 might have nailed the 1440 resolution just right, while the RTX 4070 may not be fully qualified for 4k and residual potential at 1440 isn't value gamers may want to pay extra for.

So yes, if €250 were anywhere close to where actual retail will wind up at, it's perhaps a bargain: current listing in Europe are significantly higher.

But it's only saving grace is that price.

In terms of technology the two year old RTX 4070 outclassing Intel at 200% performance isn't just a monument of shame.

It's a clear indication that Intel is at the pricing mercy of Nvidia for a slice of a market team green can utterly destroy at will. How much that reminds me of the CPU wars between Intel and AMD, until Zen...