• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

The Intel ARC B580 is Broken (?)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Kenrou

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
"The Intel ARC B580 is supposed to be the Best Budget GPU but we found some serious problems when testing it as a GPU upgrade for older systems. This GPU isn't what you might expect if you wanted to replace a GTX 1660...in a lot of ways the B580 framerates and performance will be way below expectations. "

0:00 - B580 vs Older System Upgrade
1:05 - A GTX 1060 / GTX 1660 Replacement
1:39 - Test System (Z390 & 9600K) & Setup
2:50 - Understanding the Charts
3:13 - The Good News (Sometimes)
6:12 - The B580 Falls Apart
8:22 - What's going ON? Utilization, PCIe, Drivers etc.
10:33 - It gets WORSE (ReBar Support)
12:16 - How to Check ReBar & A Workaround
13:14 - A Good GPU, RUINED for Upgrades

 
Is it just ReBAR? I see the chosen system is on the edge of ReBAR support. Nothing has changed in that aspect since Alchemist so are they just farming for clicks by repeating what was already said 2 years ago? Is there something new?
 
Either farming or just found out, something to do with the architecture, but the point stands, the older the CPU (they tested with a 9***k, so not that old) the worse the GPU will seemingly perform - not the system overall, the GPU, and apparently it didn't get any better with the new gen.

Comments pile on the video as Intel said time again that it needs a modern system, but make what you will from it, I guess, IMO it makes a dent on the supposed upgrade value if you have an older CPU :shrug:
 
It's also a PCIe x8 card, and those were performing pretty poorly on older systems.
Generally, the same conclusions were with the last Intel cards after release or something like RTX4060/RX7600.
 
He mentioned and compared with the 4060, even with the 12gb VRAM it was completely crushed in some games. Assumed culprit, Intel drivers, focusing almost exclusively on newer hardware :shrug:

Clipboard01.jpg
 
I'm just not sure who thinks of upgrading a 5-6 generations old system for new games nowadays. I mean, we talk about a 10-year-old PC or something. AMD has some point, but Intels makes people just go for the new build and it's not only because of CPUs, but motherboards and other things. For some reason, I see fewer people upgrading PCs in general. Most just move to a newer gen with everything ... keep PCs for longer and just replace everything at once. This is my point of view, so it doesn't have to be confirmed by actual numbers.

On the other hand, Intel was fixing the A series GPUs for over a year until they were a good option to buy. The B cards were just released, and only two models are listed as available. However, you can barely find them in stock anywhere (expected availability is in two weeks). Let's hope they do some more, as the B580 looks interesting for the price (MSRP at least), and a higher model is expected later this year (not officially confirmed).
 
Follow-up from Hardware Unboxed

"Intel Arc B580 Massive Overhead Issue! Upgraders Beware"

00:39 - The Problem
03:29 - Test System Specs
04:05 - Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2
04:34 - Rainbow Six Siege
04:45 - Hogwarts Legacy
05:03 - Starfield
05:16 - Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered
05:56 - Final Thoughts

 
Isn't it the gen that runs PCIe 3.0 and ReBAR doesn't really work properly? I don't remember exactly, but I feel we repeat the same conclusions.
 

Here's a technical look at it. So technical I don't get it! That or it isn't even 9am here and I haven't had a coffee yet.

I could be off, but DX12 great, Vulkan and DX11 not so much. Does that reflect in the games tested?
 

Here's a technical look at it. So technical I don't get it! That or it isn't even 9am here and I haven't had a coffee yet.

I could be off, but DX12 great, Vulkan and DX11 not so much. Does that reflect in the games tested?
Seems like it, DX12 good, everything else, not so good. So newer games like UE5 and a couple older ones like Cyberpunk, Borderlands 3 and Warcraft are safe, everything else... Well... I guess I can understand DX11 because it's on the decline (don't agree but understand), but very surprised they didn't bother with Vulkan, I mean, it's the API that's supposed to replace DX11 and DX12 with how good/efficient it is and that gets modded into every game...

Who knows, they might try to patch it with driver updates :shrug:
 
I've not paid attention to Vulkan in years. Think there was a bit of hype around it when modern Doom release (2016?) but I can't say I've seen or heard much about it in recent years. Every modern game I've seen uses DX12 so targeting that I guess gives widest coverage. Does Vulkan add value today?
 
I've not paid attention to Vulkan in years. Think there was a bit of hype around it when modern Doom release (2016?) but I can't say I've seen or heard much about it in recent years. Every modern game I've seen uses DX12 so targeting that I guess gives widest coverage. Does Vulkan add value today?
 
If you play Path of Exile 2, then switching to Vulkan may fix weird crashing issues. For some reason, DX12 causes buffering errors. I wasn't following Vulkan in general, as I never needed to. It's the only case when I found it useful.
 
DX12 also occasionally causes rendering bugs in World of Warcraft, switching to DX11 temporarily fixes it. I mean, there's quite a few games that have DX12 but doesn't quite work properly, Borderlands 3 was one of them, not sure if it was ever fixed?
 
Back