My problem is, the rx6600 still performs at least 30% better in ac unity, while costs much less and draws half the power.. and it's more stable overall
I feel like intel aims to be a rival to amd at first. nvidia is more or less untouchable. all three companies aim for business customers at first and nvidia is unbeatable at the moment thanks to a billion things that utilize nothing but CUDA
AMD has been only taken about a 15%% market share away from Nvidia, If Intel can take away another 15%% market share from the green machine then ill be happy.
@@Gimpy17 Any analyst will tell you Intel is going to eat AMDs cake, not Nvidia. GN just recently made a video discussing this with Gordon from PC world. Not a shocker either really, AMD gpu division continues to go about hands on their pockets pretending everythings fine, just like they did with CPUs for a decade. Their "competition" is non existent and their solutions are abysmal to the point where XeSS already outperforms FSR.
For those of us using Blender, the latest 3.6 version now supports OpenAPI and Embree accelerated rendering on ARC GPU's. It's a very attractive proposition, as the A770 has 16Gb of memory, and any nVidia card with the same amount will cost you more than 3x the amount. Of course it'll be faster, but 8Gb can be a real limit when working with high res textures. Personally I'd much rather trade some speed vs. more video memory. I could install 2 of these cards and still end up spending much less than on an nVidia card. Right now I have a 2060 Super with 8Gb., I'm very curious to see what cards Intel will come out with next, and whether they'll stick to their price points. I might just switch to Intel on my next build.
@@oxfordsparky actually, as blender matures, i wouldnt be shocked to see paired a770 endup being better for some rendering tasks from what one of the major rendering houses has said, the a770 hardware is amazingly competent at rt rendering, apparently their workload was pretty easy to optimize for arc one up side is, the av1 encoding can actually be used to encode the render to av1, hevc and other options on the fly at the same time, with pretty minimal perf hit, now i get what you are saying but, it also depends on the workload, my buddies work have build a few boxes that have desktop arc cards holding place til the prof cards are available from their supplier, that are being used for, encoding, rendering and running some specific data sets, now this could be done with nvidia as well, but for the cost 2 a770's are giving them higher throughput then the 3090 and 69*0xt's they have also tested, not all worksets they use nvidia and even amd for specific tasks that those cards are very much worth the money.... and the 16gb cards have allowed them to deal with datasets much larger then what a 3060 or 6600xt could have offered, infact they can run datasets any sub 16gb card either cannot or run very slowly by using system memory over pci-e.. anyway for games... i have had very few real problems... nothing i have not seen before.
I think there is a confusion with the percentages, while not exactly Intel values, if you apply 262% (162% stated in the video plus 100%) over 25 (the old avg fps) you get exactly 65 FPS, so I think Intel was showing the percentage representing the growth overall, not just the percentage of the difference between the new value and the old value. The improvement difference measured by you vs announced by intel makes more sense this way to me at least.
No, it's not. It mentions "xxx% uplift" which is clearly "+X%" not "runs at xxx%". And second, just look at the Intel page (like at 00:17 ) It says below 100% figures for the other games. This is simply a case where the highest uplift wasn't reached.
In fairness to Intel when working with percentages it is generally the correct way to interpret results, I think it gets confusing because AMD and Nvidia will often compress the figure into the multiple metric, so instead of saying 262% they'll say 2.62x the performance.
I remember one of the issues this game faced on launch is that the framerate could be single thread cpu bottlenecked because of the sheer amount of dx11 draw calls, so a cpu increase lines up with that.
@@itsTyrion I think it's a sign that the game wasn't geared for the pc, considering the ps4 opengl, and the xone dx12 implimentations with the pc left behind on dx11. really pushing up against the maximum limits for that iirc
@@proCaylak I don't know the reasoning behind it - but some PS3 games run terrible in an emulator simply due to draw call spam. Ratchet & Clank 1-3 (originally PS2 games btw!) for example still dip and drop on my Ryzen 5600 because some areas spam over 10000 draw calls per second. There are others that I'd have to look up. This wasn't too problematic on real hardware though, AFAIK.
Props to Intel's driver team for really putting this much effort and heart into a GPU generation that's starting to age like fine wine, whereas Nvidia just released another carton of already spoiling milk. I just bought an A770 16GB LE on eBay for 310 euros, which is a good deal for a card that's typically just under 400 euros or so. Yes, I'm taking a risk with this card, but I'm really interested in AV1 encoding and don't really care if I have to lower the settings from Ultra to High here or there. Honesty, I play the game and don't stare at screenshots like apparently some gamers do.
not all gamers stare at graphical fidelity painstakingly... majority of us just want constant 'above 60fps' without stutter. regarding GPU, I guess it's a mix bag right now: -Nvidia: people complain alot about their practice, but still using them nonetheless, it's because their familiarity and convenience (of course the 40 series makes more people more sinical) -AMD: Great price to performance, but the notorious driver issues still persist regardless of how people say that "it is fine now". Intel: the underdog, they continuously improve their driver's lacking, but their track record remains to be seen. We should just wait on how their next gen gpu perform. There are a lot of drama regarding the GPU market right now, it's your best bet to wait for the next gen to make a substantial upgrade, too much drama as of now (FSR exclusivity, DLSS 3 as a justification to cut performance, etc)
@@nickochioneantony9288 The AMD driver issues are much less frequent for sure, i've had AMD cards for about 4 years now, so i can safely say that's the case. Stuff doesn't just get fixed overnight.
Honestly you won’t even have to worry about gaming in the future, since the updates will be coming anyway. It’s not like the first ARC series is going to cease updates after 2-3 years, so there is plenty of time to benefit from the upcoming updates. Also, you won’t have a problem with the newer games. And the price is far better than what AMD or nVidia is offering. Can’t even have a damned 192 bit card (rtx 4060) at the same price tag.
You hate to admit it but when you see intel drivers (software) increase a games frame rate from 20 to 80 frames, you kind of need to second look the nVidia quest to have game developers optimize games with software suites rather than simply bulldog their way through new games with more cuda. You could give AMD that bone as well. How many more years would we get out of a 6700 if the games were actually tuned to run on it and do more than just race through 0's and 1's with raw horsepower?
@@jakem5039 For a card sipping on near 250W thru a straw, the performance on a 6700XT is shocking. Understandable that they all stay on the shelf regardless of current discount(s).
@@jakem5039 most 6700XTs are 2.5 slot and double 8 pin connectors, thats not cheap, the card goes thru power like an Humvee goes thru fuel. That and they're huge, alot of "value" models are triple fan and would not fit most midcases, the red devil for example is 32cm long. It looks ok on the internet but not real use and steam agrees, for all the rage about how good it is nobody is picking them up and its share is tiny.
I really gotta give Intel a round of applause for stuff like this. I think in no time, they will actually be a legitimate competitor to AMD and Nvidia. They don't quite have the mass compatibility like the other 2 do but when they do get there, I will seriously consider an Intel GPU when I upgrade
I was talking to my mates just other day about Intel GPUs. Honestly I think when I build my next PC in a few years time Intel could be the way to go. I'm impressed with their first go at gpus.
Have you tried it with DXVK yet with AC Games (Unity-Valhalla)? I have a tremendous fps improvement with it, although it's not an Intel ARC, but an old RX 580 8GB 2048sp Edit: Currently playing AC Origins with DXVK right now, shader compilation was stuttering my game at first, but when its done, there is noticeable improvement in fps
Regardless of what people think about Intel as a company, I just want to say thank you to the hard working people making these improvements for us. The ones behind the scenes putting in the time and effort have my gratitude. I really enjoy my ARC A770 LE and it just keeps getting better with time. Thank you software engineers, you guys are awesome!
I hope Intel keeps being this focused with driver work once they release their Battlemage cards next year? Starting from scratch and making these kind of gains is amazing. If I had to guess the drivers now are laying a strong foundation for future architectures in the future. We shall see.
There was a deal for a A770 16GB for 199 eur.. I just can't JUST YET put my money on Intel though, if I buy a card it's for the next few years and I can't struggle with issues for that long on my main PC, especially as I still play plenty of DX11 games. But man if I had money to spare, I would have jumped on it.
It makes sense to look at improving performance on old software as it has a bigger user base and as a lot of code is modified and reused a optimization in that game could give better performance in a number of newer games. Only thing that would hold me back from purchasing an Intel GPU when I come to upgrade my PC would be Intel itself and it's inability to commit to any market other than CPU long-term. By this I point to Optran, ssd's(They may not have been fastest but were quality) and McAfee Software.
Hey, i have enjoyed your videos for a long time now. Keep up the great work! Ps: might be fun to mess around with a m.2 to pci express adapter for those mini pc's you have, to see how the performance would differ from a desktop.
Definitely agree with Assassin’s Creed Unity holding up. Arguably one of the prettiest games ever made. It may lack raytracing but the lighting models create an atmosphere unmatched by many games that do.
Honestly at this point if I didn't already have my RX 6700, I'd be looking at getting an A750 or A770. I'm excited to see what Battlemage will improve on!
As I understand it DX12 games mostly benefit from general driver improvements, so affecting all of them at once, whereas DX9-11 needs game specific ones. The Arc is quite capable of much better performance in DX9-11 games, but Intel is years behind Nvidia and AMD in adding those game specific improvements. Arc is probably not the way to go if you play a lot of DX11 games, but it should have the brute force to play DX9 and 10 games well enough, even if you aren't getting the silly FPS you get in other cards. Unless getting 200fps instead of 100fps really matters to you then Arc is fine for DX9, and the big DX9 games (like CS:GO) are getting patched.
@@oldrandomcomputing62471080ti beats it definitely, but problem is that it is an old card and you are taking a risk when buying used....might wanna look into getting a 3060ti thats a good card at a decent price atm
I got the A770 in my main rig now. I can not be happier with it, it handles things I thought for sure it would have issues with very I was iffy about buying one but I am super glad I did.
lol % uplift always looks nice on paper, just remember. from 1fps to 10fps is 1000% uplift. numbers like 271% and 313% means that the game just barely worked before. F1 and Deathloop at least makes sense.
I did wonder if you were going to cover this when I saw the massive uplifts in this beta driver ^^ Would you be able to do a revisit of Destiny 2 for the channel? I had the opposite with that game after a recent driver fix, Intel said 11% but I got something more like 30% in some areas in the EDZ. Would be cool to see some actual proper benchmarks of this recent uplift as I think it's another great example of the DX11 work they're putting in currently :) Thanks for the video!
even after the new driver the gpu power is still far from the power target. something in the architecture or driver cannot properly load the shaders. I guess its somewhat of a silicon level issue, but that also means if Intel can fix this for battlemage, the uplift should be pretty good across the average. some games run pretty well on alchemist already and there you see performance around 3060 ti /6700xt, and some dont. and those which dont usually see the gpu cap out at just 120 to 140w instead of 190w power target. Im using an a770 as a daily driver in my work PC and its doing really well for photo/Video work. those games i play on that PC also run flawless. would buy again, but of course i personally would rather buy battlemage. alchemist still has some rough edges, but overall you gotta applaud Intel. arc is really really good for a first gen gpu product.
@@RandomGaminginHD gotta say, I love your channel, man. I've been watching for as long as I can remember. You delve into some really interesting things that most others don't. I've always appreciated that. Keep up the good work!
Nice to see improvements, although their mediocre iGPU history stops me from buying one of their cards. Iris XE has flopped after release, with buggy drivers and slow updates. This gets more updates of course and they seem to be better, but in the end the actual game performance is always a gamble
@@RandomGaminginHDyou can't take away from them though. For their first ever serious dedicated gpu attempt (in modern era times) they have not done that half bad considering.
it's a matter of patience, I can only hope that intel keeps going with newer lines of dedicated GPUs. If I want to take a shot in the dark, I think Intel Arc will be considerable 2 generations later with what they codenamed Celestial at the moment.
I'm still thinking there is something strange with your card when I look at your power draw, it's very low, which makes me think that it's underperforming. I also have a A750 but paired with a 12600 and my power draw is constantly at 190w+ draw in almost every game that use the GPU at 100% load. I will try AC unity later today and see if I get similar results as you but compared to your latest benchmark videos with the A750 I almost every time got higher performance compared to your results in the games I've tried.
@@evilleader1991 If so, I think they should test benchmark it too since it is a drag & drop install. Anyone with the knowledge of windows explorer can do.
Which one would u recommend A380 or A750 over 1660 super, for gaming, streaming and editing? Might upgrade the GPU next year. Would be playing games like Warzone, PUBG, GTA V, ETS2, few simulators and some cheap AAA titles
I currently have the 1660 super it's a really solid card and it's good value I'll probably upgrade to intel battlemage or the generation after when it comes out, modern Nvidia cards have really gone downhill since the 2080ti/3090ti If you're looking to just play GTA and stuff, something on par with a 1050ti/60 would probably do, save you paying for an expensive card twice I normally use techpowerup to compare performance it's pretty good
I was seriously considering a A770 but the 6700 XT was cheaper and more optimized so i settled for AMD again. Next time around it might just be Intel getting my money.
What really surprised me about the A750/A770 is that even though their performance seemed really lackluster compared to the competition, if you look ar benchmark charts, the A750/A770 are on par with GPUs that perform comparably to the PS5.
@@SweatyFeetGirl According to Techpowerups 25 Game average, the A750/770 sit right between an RX 6600 XT and 6700 XT, which pretty much matches PS5 performance.
@@EVPointMaster like i said, that's the best case. As soon as you play indie games or anything thats not as recrnt, you'd wish to have never gotten an arc gpu. Why be a beta tester ? It's the same with the rx 5000 series of gpu, a beta test for rdna 2
These older assasins creed games were horrendous ports. I cant even hit 90 fps on my 6800XT at everything ultra on 1440p. They work A LOT better when u lock the framerate via GPU software tho. With fps locked at 80 I've been getting a smooth frametime graph, but with it unlocked the fps was between 45 and 85 ish, with huge drops and stutters.
To me 25fps is not playable. This improvement makes the card hold more value. I expect it will take intel at least a couple years still before they can have the arc fully optimized and getting the fps it should. Would be Insane if the cards fps went up overtime with the driver updates would make it better bang for buck as it would start to out perform 8GB models it competes with
Comparing this performance with the one I get on my GTX 1060 6gb and it's still keeping up and giving your ARC A750 a good fight in this game. With a 55fps on an HDD and a few programs running. Arc still should do much better
Intel just might have a niche j. A budget market with there gpus...now if this kind of performance is squeezed into the igpus in the future and the drivers run just as good as Nvidia drivers that intel may be on to something here
Any particular reason why your CPU is only boosting to 4GHz in every video? The max boost of that CPU is 4.4GHz so there's quite a bit of performance left unused.
I mean great they're improving things, but I definitely wouldn't be happy if I'd have bought an A750 and then found it struggled to run decade old games at more than 20fps. At that point you're then just waiting and hoping Intel sort out the performance. Who's to say there aren't loads of other games like this that have similar performance issues that Intel haven't (or may never) get around to fixing.
There surely are more games with similar problems. But I also expect that most if not literally all to be fixed by something like DXVK. Which apparently was an option for this game too!
I know Tech Deals has been using this game as sort of his deal breaker as to why he can't recommend the card. Glad to see Intel workong on the problem.
Well if you look at 25fps with older driver as 100% of performance then 65fps with newer driver is considered 260% increse so intels 200 to 300% is actually correct
It depends on price tbh, if you can get an AMD or Nvidia card at same price/tier then go for them tbh. But if the Intel is noticeably cheaper then you could buy that.
Two weeks ago Digital Foundry mentioned poor performance with ARC GPUs in AC: Unity. The driver team are definitely watching RUclips.
Haha yeah I bet
🤦🏼♂️
@@oxfordsparky what?
Richard Leadbetter rejoice!
My problem is, the rx6600 still performs at least 30% better in ac unity, while costs much less and draws half the power.. and it's more stable overall
Intel optimized this game because Digital Foundry specifically used AC:Unity as the reason to not recommend intel gpus.
At this rate, Intel should have improved DX11 performance on every single game just in time for DX14 to arrive
Haha yeah
Iceberg x RandomGamingHD collab when? 🙃
Ahh another W tech youtuber stumble upon this W channel
Vulkan rules!!!!
Long live FOSS
Let's hope for another Sandy Bridge-level improvement. The ARC 2750 should obliterate the ARC 750 in every metric
A market without competition gave us nvidia, now I root for any and all chances of competition that could ever threaten the green thing
Amd has always been competition
I feel like intel aims to be a rival to amd at first. nvidia is more or less untouchable. all three companies aim for business customers at first and nvidia is unbeatable at the moment thanks to a billion things that utilize nothing but CUDA
AMD has been only taken about a 15%% market share away from Nvidia, If Intel can take away another 15%% market share from the green machine then ill be happy.
@@xFluing Not really...
@@Gimpy17 Any analyst will tell you Intel is going to eat AMDs cake, not Nvidia. GN just recently made a video discussing this with Gordon from PC world. Not a shocker either really, AMD gpu division continues to go about hands on their pockets pretending everythings fine, just like they did with CPUs for a decade. Their "competition" is non existent and their solutions are abysmal to the point where XeSS already outperforms FSR.
For those of us using Blender, the latest 3.6 version now supports OpenAPI and Embree accelerated rendering on ARC GPU's. It's a very attractive proposition, as the A770 has 16Gb of memory, and any nVidia card with the same amount will cost you more than 3x the amount. Of course it'll be faster, but 8Gb can be a real limit when working with high res textures. Personally I'd much rather trade some speed vs. more video memory. I could install 2 of these cards and still end up spending much less than on an nVidia card.
Right now I have a 2060 Super with 8Gb., I'm very curious to see what cards Intel will come out with next, and whether they'll stick to their price points. I might just switch to Intel on my next build.
Just buy a used 3090 for the same price as those two a770’s and have the best of both worlds.
@@oxfordsparky actually, as blender matures, i wouldnt be shocked to see paired a770 endup being better for some rendering tasks from what one of the major rendering houses has said, the a770 hardware is amazingly competent at rt rendering, apparently their workload was pretty easy to optimize for arc one up side is, the av1 encoding can actually be used to encode the render to av1, hevc and other options on the fly at the same time, with pretty minimal perf hit, now i get what you are saying but, it also depends on the workload, my buddies work have build a few boxes that have desktop arc cards holding place til the prof cards are available from their supplier, that are being used for, encoding, rendering and running some specific data sets, now this could be done with nvidia as well, but for the cost 2 a770's are giving them higher throughput then the 3090 and 69*0xt's they have also tested, not all worksets they use nvidia and even amd for specific tasks that those cards are very much worth the money.... and the 16gb cards have allowed them to deal with datasets much larger then what a 3060 or 6600xt could have offered, infact they can run datasets any sub 16gb card either cannot or run very slowly by using system memory over pci-e..
anyway for games... i have had very few real problems... nothing i have not seen before.
I think there is a confusion with the percentages, while not exactly Intel values, if you apply 262% (162% stated in the video plus 100%) over 25 (the old avg fps) you get exactly 65 FPS, so I think Intel was showing the percentage representing the growth overall, not just the percentage of the difference between the new value and the old value. The improvement difference measured by you vs announced by intel makes more sense this way to me at least.
ah could be right there
No, it's not. It mentions "xxx% uplift" which is clearly "+X%" not "runs at xxx%". And second, just look at the Intel page (like at 00:17 ) It says below 100% figures for the other games.
This is simply a case where the highest uplift wasn't reached.
In fairness to Intel when working with percentages it is generally the correct way to interpret results, I think it gets confusing because AMD and Nvidia will often compress the figure into the multiple metric, so instead of saying 262% they'll say 2.62x the performance.
I remember one of the issues this game faced on launch is that the framerate could be single thread cpu bottlenecked because of the sheer amount of dx11 draw calls, so a cpu increase lines up with that.
Ah makes sense, thanks
So Ubisoft went with the PS2/early PS3 tactic of "Just spam a crap ton of draw calls, it'll be fiiiiine"?!
@@itsTyrion could you elaborate on that? is it because PS2/PS3 had architechtures that were more optimized?
@@itsTyrion I think it's a sign that the game wasn't geared for the pc, considering the ps4 opengl, and the xone dx12 implimentations with the pc left behind on dx11. really pushing up against the maximum limits for that iirc
@@proCaylak I don't know the reasoning behind it - but some PS3 games run terrible in an emulator simply due to draw call spam. Ratchet & Clank 1-3 (originally PS2 games btw!) for example still dip and drop on my Ryzen 5600 because some areas spam over 10000 draw calls per second. There are others that I'd have to look up.
This wasn't too problematic on real hardware though, AFAIK.
Props to Intel's driver team for really putting this much effort and heart into a GPU generation that's starting to age like fine wine, whereas Nvidia just released another carton of already spoiling milk. I just bought an A770 16GB LE on eBay for 310 euros, which is a good deal for a card that's typically just under 400 euros or so. Yes, I'm taking a risk with this card, but I'm really interested in AV1 encoding and don't really care if I have to lower the settings from Ultra to High here or there. Honesty, I play the game and don't stare at screenshots like apparently some gamers do.
No one mentioning this but Intel already way ahead of AMD with Deep Link. Nvidia can't even with out a CPU 😂
not all gamers stare at graphical fidelity painstakingly... majority of us just want constant 'above 60fps' without stutter.
regarding GPU, I guess it's a mix bag right now:
-Nvidia: people complain alot about their practice, but still using them nonetheless, it's because their familiarity and convenience (of course the 40 series makes more people more sinical)
-AMD: Great price to performance, but the notorious driver issues still persist regardless of how people say that "it is fine now".
Intel: the underdog, they continuously improve their driver's lacking, but their track record remains to be seen. We should just wait on how their next gen gpu perform.
There are a lot of drama regarding the GPU market right now, it's your best bet to wait for the next gen to make a substantial upgrade, too much drama as of now (FSR exclusivity, DLSS 3 as a justification to cut performance, etc)
@@nickochioneantony9288 The AMD driver issues are much less frequent for sure, i've had AMD cards for about 4 years now, so i can safely say that's the case. Stuff doesn't just get fixed overnight.
Honestly you won’t even have to worry about gaming in the future, since the updates will be coming anyway. It’s not like the first ARC series is going to cease updates after 2-3 years, so there is plenty of time to benefit from the upcoming updates. Also, you won’t have a problem with the newer games. And the price is far better than what AMD or nVidia is offering. Can’t even have a damned 192 bit card (rtx 4060) at the same price tag.
You hate to admit it but when you see intel drivers (software) increase a games frame rate from 20 to 80 frames, you kind of need to second look the nVidia quest to have game developers optimize games with software suites rather than simply bulldog their way through new games with more cuda. You could give AMD that bone as well. How many more years would we get out of a 6700 if the games were actually tuned to run on it and do more than just race through 0's and 1's with raw horsepower?
The 6700xt is already a beast one of the best for the price so who knows
I mean those cards already have years of driver improvements and that's why Unity already ran fine on AMD and Nvidia.
@@jakem5039 For a card sipping on near 250W thru a straw, the performance on a 6700XT is shocking. Understandable that they all stay on the shelf regardless of current discount(s).
@@joeallen7781 what kinda UserBenchmark answer is this. The card is cheap, it's not power efficient, but it's cheap low cost to entry for high FPS.
@@jakem5039 most 6700XTs are 2.5 slot and double 8 pin connectors, thats not cheap, the card goes thru power like an Humvee goes thru fuel. That and they're huge, alot of "value" models are triple fan and would not fit most midcases, the red devil for example is 32cm long. It looks ok on the internet but not real use and steam agrees, for all the rage about how good it is nobody is picking them up and its share is tiny.
I really gotta give Intel a round of applause for stuff like this. I think in no time, they will actually be a legitimate competitor to AMD and Nvidia. They don't quite have the mass compatibility like the other 2 do but when they do get there, I will seriously consider an Intel GPU when I upgrade
Very well said
Happy Intel Arc owner here
At this point the a750 might just beat the rtx 4060
I hope so, intel must beat that a hole so that they can lower their price
@@mtaufiqn5040 it won't even come close to the 4060, ever.
@@dukejukem8843 Isn't the 4060 a shit card ?
@@dukejukem8843 Trust me, the Arc has already started shitting on that waste of money.
It does in synthetic tests but not so much in gaming.
I was talking to my mates just other day about Intel GPUs. Honestly I think when I build my next PC in a few years time Intel could be the way to go. I'm impressed with their first go at gpus.
I'm tempted by the AMD 7900, but if Battlemage turns out well and is priced competitively, I might just give it a shot.
Have you tried it with DXVK yet with AC Games (Unity-Valhalla)? I have a tremendous fps improvement with it, although it's not an Intel ARC, but an old RX 580 8GB 2048sp
Edit: Currently playing AC Origins with DXVK right now, shader compilation was stuttering my game at first, but when its done, there is noticeable improvement in fps
Yeah tried dxvk a while back with some games in a video. Great improvements in gta 4 for me
I just wish there were a way to optimize older games that wasnt manually, one by one, and only the ones that people make big complaints about.
Regardless of what people think about Intel as a company, I just want to say thank you to the hard working people making these improvements for us. The ones behind the scenes putting in the time and effort have my gratitude. I really enjoy my ARC A770 LE and it just keeps getting better with time. Thank you software engineers, you guys are awesome!
planning to buy the arc a380 thanks to ur vid
Best cheap carp simply because it for 6 gb of vram
@@loowick4074 basically just need the encoder and i play light games anyway
How much does it cost?
@@evilleader1991 120 dollars
I hope Intel keeps being this focused with driver work once they release their Battlemage cards next year? Starting from scratch and making these kind of gains is amazing. If I had to guess the drivers now are laying a strong foundation for future architectures in the future. We shall see.
Intel Arc FTW
The Arc card specs are actually really good! Wide bus, many cores and nice RT cores, with driver updates and tome they'll shine! 👍
Better lighting than most games released since then. It may be pre-baked, but it works.
There was a deal for a A770 16GB for 199 eur.. I just can't JUST YET put my money on Intel though, if I buy a card it's for the next few years and I can't struggle with issues for that long on my main PC, especially as I still play plenty of DX11 games. But man if I had money to spare, I would have jumped on it.
Yeah great deal but as you say, still a bit risky
They finally listened to Digital Foundry's Richard Leadbetter and improved AC Unity's performance!
is it just my eyes or was there a small amount of tearing when you were swinging the camera around while playing with the new driver?
I'm good for a GPU for at least 5 years, but this is quite exiting since it'll add another competitor for when I next need a card.
It makes sense to look at improving performance on old software as it has a bigger user base and as a lot of code is modified and reused a optimization in that game could give better performance in a number of newer games.
Only thing that would hold me back from purchasing an Intel GPU when I come to upgrade my PC would be Intel itself and it's inability to commit to any market other than CPU long-term. By this I point to Optran, ssd's(They may not have been fastest but were quality) and McAfee Software.
Hey, i have enjoyed your videos for a long time now. Keep up the great work! Ps: might be fun to mess around with a m.2 to pci express adapter for those mini pc's you have, to see how the performance would differ from a desktop.
Definitely agree with Assassin’s Creed Unity holding up. Arguably one of the prettiest games ever made. It may lack raytracing but the lighting models create an atmosphere unmatched by many games that do.
Yeah it looked incredible then and it still does. Definitely stands out amongst the other games visually
there even is a raytracing mod for it, but i had some graphical issues with it enabled, so sadly rather not worth the hassle
@@tobymarol7329 really? Sounds interesting, but then again, it already looks great without it.
Like a old semi with 4 gear levers and constantly changing gears for one smooth result
Honestly at this point if I didn't already have my RX 6700, I'd be looking at getting an A750 or A770. I'm excited to see what Battlemage will improve on!
Perhaps eventually this will make Nvidia do something right for once but alas they again don't really care for their consumers that much
As I understand it DX12 games mostly benefit from general driver improvements, so affecting all of them at once, whereas DX9-11 needs game specific ones. The Arc is quite capable of much better performance in DX9-11 games, but Intel is years behind Nvidia and AMD in adding those game specific improvements.
Arc is probably not the way to go if you play a lot of DX11 games, but it should have the brute force to play DX9 and 10 games well enough, even if you aren't getting the silly FPS you get in other cards. Unless getting 200fps instead of 100fps really matters to you then Arc is fine for DX9, and the big DX9 games (like CS:GO) are getting patched.
Nice. I might just get one of those intel Ark GPUs at some point.
Yeah definitely a work in progress but progress is quick!
@@RandomGaminginHD I wonder just how this GPU compares to my GTX 1080 ti. Probably worth a video.
@@oldrandomcomputing62471080ti beats it definitely, but problem is that it is an old card and you are taking a risk when buying used....might wanna look into getting a 3060ti thats a good card at a decent price atm
I got the A770 in my main rig now. I can not be happier with it, it handles things I thought for sure it would have issues with very
I was iffy about buying one but I am super glad I did.
Aesthetically speaking. This one looks like a machine rather than a toy.
lol % uplift always looks nice on paper, just remember. from 1fps to 10fps is 1000% uplift.
numbers like 271% and 313% means that the game just barely worked before. F1 and Deathloop at least makes sense.
I did wonder if you were going to cover this when I saw the massive uplifts in this beta driver ^^
Would you be able to do a revisit of Destiny 2 for the channel? I had the opposite with that game after a recent driver fix, Intel said 11% but I got something more like 30% in some areas in the EDZ.
Would be cool to see some actual proper benchmarks of this recent uplift as I think it's another great example of the DX11 work they're putting in currently :)
Thanks for the video!
even after the new driver the gpu power is still far from the power target.
something in the architecture or driver cannot properly load the shaders.
I guess its somewhat of a silicon level issue, but that also means if Intel can fix this for battlemage, the uplift should be pretty good across the average.
some games run pretty well on alchemist already and there you see performance around 3060 ti /6700xt, and some dont. and those which dont usually see the gpu cap out at just 120 to 140w instead of 190w power target.
Im using an a770 as a daily driver in my work PC and its doing really well for photo/Video work. those games i play on that PC also run flawless. would buy again, but of course i personally would rather buy battlemage. alchemist still has some rough edges, but overall you gotta applaud Intel. arc is really really good for a first gen gpu product.
That's really impressive! I'm happy to see Intel making some progress with their GPUs. I'm glad they didn't totally give up on it.
Same :)
@@RandomGaminginHD gotta say, I love your channel, man. I've been watching for as long as I can remember. You delve into some really interesting things that most others don't. I've always appreciated that. Keep up the good work!
Gotta say the Arc A770 LE was worth it i got it for my first pc build and i am seeing amazing progress with these updates gradually happening
Nice to see improvements, although their mediocre iGPU history stops me from buying one of their cards. Iris XE has flopped after release, with buggy drivers and slow updates. This gets more updates of course and they seem to be better, but in the end the actual game performance is always a gamble
Heat hopefully the next gen Intel cards will be better at launch
@@RandomGaminginHDyou can't take away from them though. For their first ever serious dedicated gpu attempt (in modern era times) they have not done that half bad considering.
it's a matter of patience, I can only hope that intel keeps going with newer lines of dedicated GPUs. If I want to take a shot in the dark, I think Intel Arc will be considerable 2 generations later with what they codenamed Celestial at the moment.
What about dxvk? How does it compare to the new drivers?
I'm still thinking there is something strange with your card when I look at your power draw, it's very low, which makes me think that it's underperforming. I also have a A750 but paired with a 12600 and my power draw is constantly at 190w+ draw in almost every game that use the GPU at 100% load.
I will try AC unity later today and see if I get similar results as you but compared to your latest benchmark videos with the A750 I almost every time got higher performance compared to your results in the games I've tried.
Time to release Battlemage!
Rooting for intel
2 days ago I was looking into DXVK improvements on generic unity apps.
Guess who couldn't get any information on it thanks to this patch.
I think that's a pretty impressive uplift, and yes Unity does still look great, as does Syndicate.
I am wondering if Intel will make a big update to improve overall DX11 performance like what they did on DX9🤔
Wow ..huge W for Intel
Does using DXVK help for dx9-11 games on Intel cards?
Most likely yes
@@evilleader1991 If so, I think they should test benchmark it too since it is a drag & drop install. Anyone with the knowledge of windows explorer can do.
Since we are testing Assassin's Creed Unity, can you do a whole "Assassin's Creed series on Intel ARC"?
That is drastically better though, good for the enxt gen GPU from intel **if there is one.
Which one would u recommend A380 or A750 over 1660 super, for gaming, streaming and editing? Might upgrade the GPU next year.
Would be playing games like Warzone, PUBG, GTA V, ETS2, few simulators and some cheap AAA titles
I currently have the 1660 super it's a really solid card and it's good value
I'll probably upgrade to intel battlemage or the generation after when it comes out, modern Nvidia cards have really gone downhill since the 2080ti/3090ti
If you're looking to just play GTA and stuff, something on par with a 1050ti/60 would probably do, save you paying for an expensive card twice
I normally use techpowerup to compare performance it's pretty good
@@archivedcafeteria thanks
I was seriously considering a A770 but the 6700 XT was cheaper and more optimized so i settled for AMD again. Next time around it might just be Intel getting my money.
Common ARC W, but rare Intel W
Reckon you could review A380 6GB again in light of these drivers? It's £129.99 on Ebuyer (July 2023)
Very good baseline game to train a basic starter for other game engines to default cheaply
I wish Intel nothing but the best with their GPU's, the more players in the GPU market the better for us gamers.
Unity is still a superb looking game. Amazing really.
I'll be paring it with an i5 12400f 16gb ram and MSI h610 mobo I'm exited for my new Intel GPU
What really surprised me about the A750/A770 is that even though their performance seemed really lackluster compared to the competition, if you look ar benchmark charts, the A750/A770 are on par with GPUs that perform comparably to the PS5.
thats in the games that are best case... the vast majority of games its between a 180$ rx 6600 and 230$ 6650xt..
@@SweatyFeetGirl According to Techpowerups 25 Game average, the A750/770 sit right between an RX 6600 XT and 6700 XT, which pretty much matches PS5 performance.
@@EVPointMaster like i said, that's the best case. As soon as you play indie games or anything thats not as recrnt, you'd wish to have never gotten an arc gpu. Why be a beta tester ? It's the same with the rx 5000 series of gpu, a beta test for rdna 2
These older assasins creed games were horrendous ports. I cant even hit 90 fps on my 6800XT at everything ultra on 1440p. They work A LOT better when u lock the framerate via GPU software tho. With fps locked at 80 I've been getting a smooth frametime graph, but with it unlocked the fps was between 45 and 85 ish, with huge drops and stutters.
Amd being from the most loved to the most hated intel going from being the most hated to the most loved
I tested this game yesterday , i was surprised that the fps in dx11 *now* is the same fps value i got when using DXVK in the old driver
When Dave starts using slang, you know what east London chavs have done to him
Thinking about it
Igp will go up to ???
Or only dekstop
The screen tear is trible
They definitely have to improve perfromance on directx 11 games or older , i play mostly directx 11 games
They did it in less then 2years
Is this worth buying if planning to play older games as well?
To me 25fps is not playable. This improvement makes the card hold more value. I expect it will take intel at least a couple years still before they can have the arc fully optimized and getting the fps it should. Would be Insane if the cards fps went up overtime with the driver updates would make it better bang for buck as it would start to out perform 8GB models it competes with
I got the ASRock 16GB Arc A770 card and it is a true contender against Nvidia. I predict it will be on par with the RTX 4070 with the right drivers.
Does this patch also affect the performance in other older AC games?
Comparing this performance with the one I get on my GTX 1060 6gb and it's still keeping up and giving your ARC A750 a good fight in this game. With a 55fps on an HDD and a few programs running. Arc still should do much better
Love your videos! Have you ever considered testing Ark: Survival Evolved? Would love to see how it performs on the Arc a750
Bloody hell that's a big improvement. Kind of shows how bad the drivers were before.
Yeah who knows what other performance is waiting to be unlocked
I feel unity was addressed because of the Digital Foundry video
Just ordered my Intel arc a750 for $330 Cad! Half the price of an rtx 4060ti
That poor tree 😢
160% increase is 260% of the original value
Intel just might have a niche j. A budget market with there gpus...now if this kind of performance is squeezed into the igpus in the future and the drivers run just as good as Nvidia drivers that intel may be on to something here
I still think Intel needs to drop some higher tier gpu's. Like Arc A790 or something. While A770 is good value for money, it's a mid tier GPU at best.
It took me 2years for amd to get it almost 20 for nvidia get what I mean
I got 8X and 16X operations per execution unit
Lookin forward to the day we will have the option of an all intel, or all amd machine. Maybe nvidia will join the party some day 👀
For as long as x86 is the standard that’s not going to happen even if Nvidia wanted to. Intel’s not going to hand them an x86 for any reason.
You've forgot timestamps and you know that I don't like that..! ;-)
Hey, at least Intel's putting effort into their drivers - unlike AMD.
Extra 40W on the power draw could be part of it.
Yeah for sure
Any particular reason why your CPU is only boosting to 4GHz in every video? The max boost of that CPU is 4.4GHz so there's quite a bit of performance left unused.
I mean great they're improving things, but I definitely wouldn't be happy if I'd have bought an A750 and then found it struggled to run decade old games at more than 20fps. At that point you're then just waiting and hoping Intel sort out the performance. Who's to say there aren't loads of other games like this that have similar performance issues that Intel haven't (or may never) get around to fixing.
There surely are more games with similar problems. But I also expect that most if not literally all to be fixed by something like DXVK. Which apparently was an option for this game too!
Still the wattage my concern; as itx user
The average fps went up 160%
Do Intel GPU have any sort of setting to get rid of screen tearing?
I know Tech Deals has been using this game as sort of his deal breaker as to why he can't recommend the card. Glad to see Intel workong on the problem.
Is Ruby still making videos?
Have you got an A380? I'm wondering if it can beat a 1650 GTX now.
Well if you look at 25fps with older driver as 100% of performance then 65fps with newer driver is considered 260% increse so intels 200 to 300% is actually correct
anyone can shortly explain why games need specific optimizations?
Yeah, even I want to know
Arc a380 testing?
Im sure these updates are helping Intel with their iGPU drivers aswell. AMD has always had a leg up because of their experience with GPU development.
It should for the most recent ones since they share drivers and architecture.
would you recommend buying it since the drivers are improving ?
It depends on price tbh, if you can get an AMD or Nvidia card at same price/tier then go for them tbh. But if the Intel is noticeably cheaper then you could buy that.
So to compare to other brands the I te 99% AI configuration graphics chip has 512eu times it by 2x 4x 8X and now 16x output to cuda