Official Intel Arc A730 and A770M benchmarks suggest RTX 3050 Ti, RTX 3060-like performance

nanoguy

Posts: 1,231   +24
Staff member
In context: Intel's Arc A-series family of discrete GPUs may turn out to be this year's most underwhelming hardware release. And that's despite the company's best effort to enter a challenging market where Nvidia dominates the high-end segment and AMD provides alternatives for budget-minded gamers. The Arc 7 laptop GPUs have yet to make their debut, but they're officially aimed at Nvidia's more modest offerings from the Ampere range.

Earlier this week, a review of the Arc A380 desktop graphics card revealed why Intel isn't keen on releasing it worldwide. Performance is worse than AMD's slowest RX 6000 series card and even Nvidia's GTX 1650 which made its debut three years ago. Part of this is to be expected, as Nvidia and AMD have been perfecting their drivers for years and a first-gen discrete GPU architecture from Intel is unlikely to challenge their current offerings on anything other than price or energy efficiency.

According to Tom's Hardware, Intel recently sent out review guidelines for its mobile Arc Alchemist GPUs and how they perform in modern AAA games. Specifically, the company is sharing information about the Arc A770M and Arc A730M GPUs, which are based on the ACM-G10 die. Intel seems to be positioning them as alternatives to Nvidia's RTX 3050 Ti and RTX 3060 laptop GPUs, which are entry-level offerings in the Ampere range.

The A730M has 24 Xe cores running at up to 1,100 MHz, 24 ray tracing units, and 12 gigabytes of GDDR6 paired over a 192-bit interface. Its bigger brother, the A770M, has 32 Xe cores running at 1,650 MHz, 32 ray tracing units, and 16 gigabytes of VRAM connected via a 265-bit interface.

As with Nvidia's RTX 30 series laptop GPUs, Intel's Arc A730M and 770M GPUs will come with varied TGP ratings that will be configured by manufacturers based on their design goals for particular laptop models. They range between 80 to 120 watts for the A730M and 120 to 150 watts for the A770M.

Game (Settings) RTX 3050 Ti Arc A730M RTX 3060 Arc A770M
Assassin's Creed Valhalla (High) 38 fps 50 fps 74 fps 69 fps
Borderlands 3 (Ultra) 45 fps 50 fps 60 fps 79 fps

Control (High)

42 fps 62 fps 70 fps 89 fps
Cyberpunk 2077 (Ultra) 39 fps 49 fps 54 fps 68 fps
Death Stranding (Ultra) 89 fps 87 fps 113 fps 102 fps
Dirt 5 (High) 64 fps 61 fps 83 fps 87 fps
F1 2021 (Ultra) 68 fps 86 fps 96 fps 123 fps

Far Cry 6 (Ultra)

63 fps 68 fps 80 fps 82 fps
Gears of War 5 (Ultra) 58 fps 52 fps 72 fps 73 fps
Horizon Zero Dawn (Ultimate Quality) 63 fps 50 fps 80 fps 68 fps
Metro Exodus (Ultra) 39 fps 54 fps 53 fps 69 fps
Red Dead Redemption 2 (High) 46 fps 60 fps 66 fps 77 fps

Strange Brigade (Ultra)

98 fps 123 fps 134 fps 172 fps
The Division 2 (Ultra) 63 fps 51 fps 78 fps 86 fps
The Witcher 3 (Ultra) 96 fps 101 fps 124 fps 141 fps
Total War Saga: Troy (Ultra) 48 fps 66 fps 71 fps 86 fps
Watch Dogs Legion (High) 59 fps 71 fps 77 fps 89 fps

Intel's benchmarks suggest its A730M and A770M GPUs can surpass the RTX 3050 Ti and RTX 3060 in terms of 1080p performance across a variety of games by as much as 48 percent. However, Team Blue admits to lower performance in certain titles like Death Stranding and Horizon Zero Dawn, so the average performance advantage works out to just 12-13 percent.

The problem with these results is that Intel didn't specify the TGP of the Arc GPUs it used for testing, while the guidelines indicate the RTX 3050 Ti with a TGP of 60 watts and the RTX 3060 with a TGP of 85 watts. Both figures are lower than the minimums for the Arc A730M and A770M, and significantly lower than the maximum configurable TGPs, making it hard to judge the merits of the Alchemist architecture when compared to the competition.

The Intel Arc GPUs are equipped with more VRAM than their supposed Nvidia counterparts, which is a positive. They may also be capable of better performance when configured to use more power, but the same would be true of the RTX 3050 Ti and RTX 3060. Public Intel documentation suggests that Arc Alchemist GPUs need Resizable BAR to perform their best, and that feature may not have been enabled on the MSI Pulse G66 (RTX 3060) and Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 (RTX 3050 Ti) test machines.

In any case, it looks like Intel isn't interested in competing at the higher-end with this first generation of discrete GPUs. The company does have an Arc Limited Edition graphics card for desktop systems that might feature higher clocks than the A770M, but it is unclear whether it will even approach RTX 3070-levels of performance as rumored.

Permalink to story.

 

Achaios

Posts: 389   +1,079
Yeah, no.

With Intel GPUs, the perf they demonstrate at 3D Mark, you got to expect it's gonna b at least 25% lower in actual games b/c Intel just don't care enough about drivers.

Has been shown to b true in the recent Benchmarks run by our China Overlords who got to test the first Intel discreet GPUs and posted honestly about their perf.

No1 in 3D Mark.

Below every single comparable AMD & NVIDIA GPU in actual game tests.

That's Intel 101 in a nutshell for you. Zero integrity "griftah"'s.
 

Eldritch

Posts: 436   +696
Yeah, no.

With Intel GPUs, the perf they demonstrate at 3D Mark, you got to expect it's gonna b at least 25% lower in actual games b/c Intel just don't care enough about drivers.
Techspot itself had an article about how Intel missed the driver train even when they make big deal out of it.
https://www.techspot.com/news/93562-intel-didnt-drop-day-one-drivers-elden-ring.html?
Doesn't bode well for the new GPUs. Not at all.
But the thing is, it will still sell, at least in laptops. Intel has massive influence over manufacturers and there will be various models with Arc gpus. Many will buy it out of sheer ignorance.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,162   +3,741
Who are they going to challenge on energy efficiency? A380 is slower than the 1650 (12nm!) and 6400 while consuming a good bit more power.
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 1,116   +818
Interested to see it's encoding ability - especially for AV1 - only the big guys really encode in it as it's so intensive for CPUs
 

yRaz

Posts: 4,513   +5,358
What's a TGP? Don't you mean TDP? And with 600 watt power connectors, does power consumption even matter anymore? If you ask manufacturers the only thing that matters is performance and if you ask consumers, the only thing that matters is price.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,521   +2,493
Techspot itself had an article about how Intel missed the driver train even when they make big deal out of it.
https://www.techspot.com/news/93562-intel-didnt-drop-day-one-drivers-elden-ring.html?
Doesn't bode well for the new GPUs. Not at all.
But the thing is, it will still sell, at least in laptops. Intel has massive influence over manufacturers and there will be various models with Arc gpus. Many will buy it out of sheer ignorance.
It isn't influence based, it's product based. Intel has far more SKUs than AMD to fit far more form factors and overall perf targets OEMs want.

AMD also has no desktop CPU with igpu for OEMs which removes them from the office market almost entirely. Another thing OEMs want but AMD doesn't have. AMD mobile supply is trash and they are punished for it. As you can see, AMD isn't exactly tight with OEMs.

Stop thinking Intel is only getting by, by being shady. It gets old.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,521   +2,493
AMD survived on Polaris alone for a couple years, so Intel not making it in time for next gen will most likely be a non-issue if the overall performance is good enough.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,162   +3,741
Wait. What? What about AMD CPUs that ends with G? It's APUs for Desktop. You are wrong.
G series exist but for most office type PC their iGPU is probably overkill.
Am curious to see how Zen 4 with its small iGPU will do but that should definitely be a cheaper option for OEM going forward.
 

yRaz

Posts: 4,513   +5,358
G series exist but for most office type PC their iGPU is probably overkill.
Am curious to see how Zen 4 with its small iGPU will do but that should definitely be a cheaper option for OEM going forward.
a Ryzen 3 series APU isn't over kill for office use.
 

LuxZg

Posts: 7   +4
Despite all the negatives, it does mean that A780 on desktop could be good for much of the mainstream segment. Now what we really need is - price/performance numbers.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 1,061   +748
Team Blue doesn't aim high with Alchemist
It should be noted that the above mentioned GPUs are NOT the high end offerings Intel is working on. These are lower tier and mobile parts... Comparing them to high end AMD and Nvidia parts is silly and is very much less than objective.

These GPU's are supposed to perform in the lower and mid-range tiers, by design.
 

yannus

Posts: 69   +62
Too early to have an opinion. Only Intel's reputation and past speak right now. I remember that they made a graphic card a long time ago that they quickly abandoned. If I remember well it was at the time of ati rage 128 ant riva tnt. The good old times just after 3dfx and before transform and lighting. Anyways without prices and proper reviews, nothing can be said except than the performance are better than what I expected. If they have an attractive final product and they continue with further generations of graphic cards, then they might become interesting.
 

Rocky4040

Posts: 75   +100
I hope they pull it off and actually get some decent GPU's out but it's fast becoming to little to late since AMD & Nvidia will have moved on to their new GPU's here soon. I also do not agree with them setting the rules for how to review and power points of others GPU's my thinking is give your product out for reviews and if it stacks up to what's currently out in the wild then your product will become a success.

If you have to set power targets and a bunch of rules just so your products looks better than maybe you should go back to the drawing board and rethink your designs. This goes for any company with new products though not just Intel. Release your product to the world let it be reviewed let the reviewers give HONEST reviews I said honest capped because there are also a lot of review sites that give bias reviewers towards companies they like or got paid to do or are fan boys of certain companies and their reviews show this and smart people know to stay away form those type of sites.

Like I said I hope they do well as we need another player in the market to shake things up a lot. But from what I am seeing so far it looks non to promising and probably won't be until next gen GPU's after ARK or whatever these are called before they shake things up. I also remember the last time they tried to enter the big boy graphics card market which was a huge fail for Intel and their i740 cards were way below par with what was in the market already and were only good for desktop type things and if you tried to do anything more their drivers were even weaker than the i740 hardware.

I am sure they have learned their lesson form those days but then again there is probably no one left working there from when the i740 was a huge fail and lets hope they do not rinse & repeat from those days.