Intel Arc A380 Review: First-Gen GPU. What's Going On?

Irata

Posts: 2,190   +3,784
I shudder to think what kind of a product it takes to wrestle the

this is the worst GPU release since I can remember

title from the Radeon 6500XT as neither the 1630 nor Arc A380 managed that.
Yes, I know that it is stupidly cut, not arguing there. But it was released on time with drivers that did not result in a crash fest, so that‘s something.

Note: Compared to earlier reviews that mentioned massive problems with fan control, overlay, crashing and some games not even running (that was after Arc‘s official release btw), is this no longer an issue for the Arc A380 with current drivers ?
 

mbrowne5061

Posts: 2,033   +1,238
Any word on its transcoding/Plex capabilities?

For a while, Intel & nVidia kept AMD on the outside when it came to DRM/transcoding/DIY streaming media. I think that might still be the case. Any word on if these GPUs from Intel might be a good/reasonable choice for a Plex box?
 

Dr Roboto

Posts: 38   +73
I know it is not an official release outside of China, but ouch. I get it, release it into the wild and then work on the drivers before releasing it to the rest of the world. Ok, but they had to know that reviewers would get a hold of them and show how bad they perform. I mean, they compete with hardware from 5 years ago, barely. It is an alternative at a low price point, but how can they not be better than this. Is the jump from integrated to discrete GPUs that big? I would not mind such a poor showing if it was clear about the future roadmap, but they idea that they could just give up now would be ridiculous. Let's hope they stay at it and in a year or two can deliver an affordable and competitive GPU.
 

p51d007

Posts: 3,301   +2,895
I'm not a gamer, haven't been since the days of the doom series.
But, my i5 is in need of replacement. This might be a good alternative to
Nvidia. The only "graphics" processing I need is for photoshop.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 2,215   +2,748
TechSpot Elite
I'm not a gamer, haven't been since the days of the doom series.
But, my i5 is in need of replacement. This might be a good alternative to
Nvidia. The only "graphics" processing I need is for photoshop.

Considering this is a gaming-focused card and falls well short of where it needs to be on that front, I wouldn't count on it having good support for it's non-gaming uses. Buy a cheap used Nvidia or AMD GPU (GTX1650 or RX570/5500) and enjoy good driver support.
 

maroon1

Posts: 145   +160
A lot of games are tested on medium setting.

I wish if you at least turned texures to high or ultra, 6GB GPU will run those with almost no hit in performance. Just notice Rainbow Siege with HD texures enabled, ARC 380 (with reBar) has better lows than even 6500XT on PCI-E4.0. Larger memory means you can run higher texures with smaller impact on performance


Overall not bad at all. RX6400 cost 150 dollar in newegg. If ARC 380 already competes with it with bad drivers, then ARC is better choice. Arc 380 has larger memory and also will get better fps when intel fix the drivers. More future proof than 6400XT

 

bluetooth fairy

Posts: 179   +111
Seems more like Intel ar#e, sorry.
Intel is 24 years away from NV, I mean the days of Riva128 and i740 -- the last Intel desktop graphics card.
 

VitalyT

Posts: 6,355   +7,075
If the card's performance wasn't lame enough, Intel picked the worst possible time to bring these to the market, when the market sure as hell doesn't need them.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 2,215   +2,748
TechSpot Elite
A lot of games are tested on medium setting.

I wish if you at least turned texures to high or ultra, 6GB GPU will run those with almost no hit in performance. Just notice Rainbow Siege with HD texures enabled, ARC 380 (with reBar) has better lows than even 6500XT on PCI-E4.0. Larger memory means you can run higher texures with smaller impact on performance


Overall not bad at all. RX6400 cost 150 dollar in newegg. If ARC 380 already competes with it with bad drivers, then ARC is better choice. Arc 380 has larger memory and also will get better fps when intel fix the drivers. More future proof than 6400XT

Cherrypicking a single game doesn't support any arguments either way. ARC380 doesn't compete with the 6500 particularly well just yet as most people with PCIe 4.0 want better cards than these as they've spent money recently for a computer and want halfway decent performance. The 570 or maybe a used 1650 works better here.

The real low end people that are a reasonable target market for these low end GPUs are older PCIe 3.0 systems or Office PCs that are being replaced. The 6400 is gimped by PCIe3 but not too badly since you're running at medium settings for many games. The 1650 would be the best bet except for it's $200 price. And the Arc could have been good except it requires both ReBAR and for some reason, a PSU power cable?

Frankly the most reasonable option for older/low end PCs right now would be if the 6400 came down to ~$120-130 or the 1650 to it's $150 list. And that's what I hope the A380's true effect is: bringing down Nvidia's and AMD's low end prices some more.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,190   +3,784
Overall not bad at all. RX6400 cost 150 dollar in newegg. If ARC 380 already competes with it with bad drivers, then ARC is better choice. Arc 380 has larger memory and also will get better fps when intel fix the drivers. More future proof than 6400XT
Good luck with that - the Chinese retailer JD lists the Gunnir ARC A380 for RMB 1329 ($194).
The cheapest RX 6400 I could find at the same retailer was RMB 1099 ($162).

In the end, both need to be a lot cheaper to make even remotely sense. Tbh, I had hoped for the A380 to be the first modern uncut entry level GPU as what AMD released is a feature cut mobile GPU and nVidia didn‘t bother releasing anything at all.

 

neeyik

Posts: 2,015   +2,335
Staff member
In the end, both need to be a lot cheaper to make even remotely sense.
Unfortunately, with Arc, GeForce, and Radeon products all using TSMC and Samsung for chip manufacturing (and with the next round of GeForce models, it’ll all be TSMC), AIB vendors are at the mercy of the fabs increasing their prices, which ultimately gets passed on to the vendors. The days of ultra-cheap graphics cards may only be a thing of the past now. Intel may well have wanted to significantly undercut AMD and Nvidia, but they’re probably unwilling to absorb the fab price increases.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,190   +3,784
Just watching GN‘s video on their experience with Arc drivers - did you not notice anything like that ?
 

EdmondRC

Posts: 311   +421
Very good chance that it will surpass the 6400 if Intel can get its drivers right. Intel should undercut and sell this part at $100 to get some out the door. I would probably buy one just to experiment with it at that price.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 3,528   +5,949
So in summary, it pulls more power and averages slightly slower then the now 3.5 year old 1650. It's just on 6400 territory, a card often considered to be a total flop, at least both of these cards can run under 75 watt, in low profile configs. This is also not possible for the A380.

Honestly really disappointing. I was hoping this thing could at least match the perf of the 1650 super while keeping power under 75w, considering it is on a more advanced node being unable to do this.....well frankly it stinks of raja.