Intel Arc Graphics A770 Launching 12 October For $329 USD

[user1]

I just took a look at the benchmarks on Intel's promotion page. It advertises running Cyberpunk 2077 @ just over 60 FPS at a resolution of 1440p for the A770. That's pretty unimpressive really. I can already get that on an AMD 5500XT.

Question is, what graphics settings did they use in the benchmark. If they used Ultra settings, I'd say this is quite a decent result. If you achieve 60 fps in that game on 1440p with your 5500xt, then you definitely run the game on low settings. There's just no way this card will achieve this result on higher settings. Its performance is similar to an RX 580, which struggles with this game even on 1080p.

[CochainComplex]

At that price, they might have a compelling offering. We'll see.

I'm so disappointed by Nvidia's pricing & power trend that I might be really tempted to get one of these, depending on how RDNA 3 looks. That said, I don't have any strong performance demands, or else it might not even be an option.

Nvidia has great products (dispite of ther closed source driver) but is so out of touch with the real world. Now that even prime partners like evga are leaving the game I wouldn't even consider to buy some of their current lineup.

[brad0]

It would be already great if they are on par or slightly better then their nvidia/and counterpart. I would assume good drivers as we already know from the iGPu. If this is the case I think they are going to have a lot of customers.

It amazes me how deluded people are.

[GunpowderGuy]

Seems like a serious contender for the price point. As long as the schedule hardware bug rumour was false, or the error was mitigated in software with little performance loss or compromises

[pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx]

It would be already great if they are on par or slightly better then their nvidia/and counterpart. I would assume good drivers as we already know from the iGPu. If this is the case I think they are going to have a lot of customers.

The chances of any new entrant to the dGPU space being competitive with Nvidia or AMD for gaming in their very first hardware / driver release to consumers is non-existent. Intel's iGPUs were so slow that it's not like they've had a gaming focus in their drivers for the last several years and are just applying that to different hardware.

The drivers are a mess for DirectX 11.

[pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx]

It would be all good if it wasn't for all the rumours that Intel is cancelling future discrete graphic cards due to development cost and the market not being in a "buy everything" that was a few months ago. They are releasing this because these cards now because the cards were ready and was sitting around until the drivers were in a "good enough" status.
So, despite wanting more competition in this market, I'm skeptical of buying if the platform might be dead in a year or so. So I'd wait for the 2nd or 3rd generation to jump in, don't want to be like HDDVD or Betamax.

Intel is still doing a lot on the software ecosystem for these cards that doesn't seem like a good investment if they'd already decided to cancel future cards. Most of the noise around this is just FUD from random forum posters like you.

[skeevy420]

phoronix

12 October at ap rice of just $329 USD.

a price

Linux benchmarks will come when available while still highly relevant are the Linux driver requirements for the Arc Graphics A380 as well as my initial Intel Arc Graphics A380 Linux experience for those interested.

available. While

[pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx]

I just took a look at the benchmarks on Intel's promotion page. It advertises running Cyberpunk 2077 @ just over 60 FPS at a resolution of 1440p for the A770. That's pretty unimpressive really. I can already get that on an AMD 5500XT. Granted that's without ray tracing, which doesn't really add a lot to the experience for the most part.

Wait, you are comparing ray tracing performance vs. non ray tracing performance like that's a valid thing? Saying it doesn't add a lot to the experience for you doesn't make it a reasonable comparison. RDNA 2 performance with ray tracing on is garbage. AMD checked a box for marketing and were able to say their cards offered it.

[pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx]

I'm going to grab one to play with, especially if it's $329 for the 16GB version.

[stormcrow]

Question is, what graphics settings did they use in the benchmark. If they used Ultra settings, I'd say this is quite a decent result. If you achieve 60 fps in that game on 1440p with your 5500xt, then you definitely run the game on low settings. There's just no way this card will achieve this result on higher settings. Its performance is similar to an RX 580, which struggles with this game even on 1080p.

If you bothered to look, they explicitly said "High", which is the same settings (excluding ray tracing) I use for my 5500XT. The raytracing is pretty much irrelevant for the vast majority of the game. It's a nice thing to have, but it's really not a big deal. IF my GPU died, I might consider the 770, but given Intel's historically horrific drivers I'd probably spend a little extra and get an AMD card instead, especially since I have an AMD system already. $350 for the same performance compared to a 3 year old card isn't a great deal.

And I'm telling you I get between 55-65 FPS with "HIGH" settings at an average of 58 FPS @ 1440p. I don't care about your opinion or assumptions. I'm looking cold hard real numbers that I play with nearly every damned night. I'm still reevaluating that under Win 11, since I've played the game on 10 till this week.

Raytracing is extremely hard on hardware, I grant that, but the end result is what matters and a feature that doesn't really bring much extra to a game is more of a gimmick than a selling point, especially when it's extremely computationally expensive.