The CPU spends so much time waiting on the GPU that it has room for other work. With integrated graphics, they're so slow that it's often beneficial to move work from the GPU to the CPU. This is something Intel has already talked about, how using the integrated graphics drivers as the base for Arc hampered overall performance, and it's something the driver team continues to work on. What's likely happening is that Arc's drivers are becoming more CPU limited at lighter settings, meaning they can't scale as much as the AMD and Nvidia GPUs. Any of these cards easily handle 1080p medium, but if you have a 144Hz monitor, you might prefer one of the non-Arc cards - at least for the time being. Arc performance improves by 56% compared to 1080p ultra, but the RTX 3060 is 68% faster and the RX 6650 XT is 73% faster. If you're primarily interested in 1440p gaming, especially if you're willing to drop a few settings from ultra to high, the Arc A770 LE ends up as the better option against its direct competitors - again, assuming you don't want to play a game where Intel hasn't yet optimized the drivers.Īs you might expect, given what we've already seen, 1080p medium actually decreases the Arc A770's relative performance. Also, note that only Flight Simulator and Total War: Warhammer 3 failed to average 60 fps or more. It also basically ties or beats the RX 6650 XT across the suite, trailing by 1% slower in Far Cry 6 and leading by up to 26% (RDR2). Looking at the individual games again, the A770 gets a clean sweep of the RTX 3060 now, with leads ranging from 6% to as much as 32%. Overall, the A770 still averages more than 60 fps, and it's 18% faster than the RTX 3060 and 8% faster than the RX 6650 XT - but still 13% slower than the RX 6700 XT and 11% slower than the RTX 3060 Ti. That drop is also consistent with the Arc A750, so the extra VRAM on the A770 LE isn't really coming into play. Stepping up to 1440p Ultra drops the A770's performance by 22% compared to 1080p ultra, while the competing AMD and Nvidia cards lose 29% and 25%, respectively. Take the best results (Borderlands 3, Forza Horizon 5, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Watch Dogs Legion) if Intel can get similar relative performance in a wider test suite, overall performance could easily improve by 10–20 percent.īut if you're thinking about picking up an Arc GPU, it's important to know that right now, there are going to be situations where the drivers hold Arc back. At the same time, assuming Intel continues to put a serious effort into improving and optimizing its drivers, we could see some impressive performance increases over time. If we were to extend our test suite to dozens more games, perhaps with more older titles that don't use DX12 or Vulkan, we expect the overall A770 performance would skew downward. Finally, the A7 XT split the games 50-50, with Arc trailing by as much as 19% (Horizon Zero Dawn again) and leading by as much as 28% (Red Dead Redemption 2 again). Elsewhere, the A770 leads by anywhere from 4% (Flight Simulator) to as much as 35% (Red Dead Redemption 2). Interestingly, that's a DX12 game, but Intel apparently hasn't fully optimized for it yet. Against the 3060, there's only one game in our test suite where the Arc A770 doesn't claim the lead: Horizon Zero Dawn. That's a bit disappointing, as the A770 LE comes with twice as much VRAM, though 8GB of memory doesn't usually hold back performance at 1080p.įlipping through the individual game results, things become a bit more chaotic. That puts it on equal footing with the RX 6650 XT (2% behind, if you want to be exact). It averaged 85 fps across our test suite and outperformed the RTX 3060 by 13%. Starting with 1080p and "ultra" settings, the Arc A770 puts up some good results.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |