RTX 4060 or Intel ARC B580

[birblord gaming]

I usually play story-based games and casual multiplayer games like Helldivers and Battlefield. Which card should I go with? My budget can afford these cards, but I don't think I can go higher

[r.linder]

B580 is better overall for the price and because it offers 4GB more VRAM, if the 4060 offered 12GB then that'd be another thing

Also if you can afford a 4060 then you can afford a 6700-XT which is around 10 bucks more, still offers 12GB VRAM, but performs at least 10-15% faster than both the B580 and 4060

At least with the B580 you can afford price/performance value, but you can't with the 4060 because it's just awful value in comparison to both, costs too much and doesn't offer as much memory which was stupid.

[Trout]

B580 definitely. keep in mind that because intel is new to making GPUs their drivers are "emulating" DX9 and DX11 games. you might want to see if the B580 performs well in older games

[90054321564584560]

amd

[Corona Scurrae]

4060 if stability cuda and efficiency is important to you
6750xt if you want to game but don't care about quality control and drivers
B580 if you are drinking cool aid and think Intel is not going to axe their dgpu branch after celestial

[Tonepoet]

A.M.D. might announce an RX 8600 graphics card that would logically be sold at the same price point as a 4060 at C.E.S. on the sixth. It'd logically be a $300 card like the 7600 XT and the 4060.

Otherwise I'd go with the B580 as the obvious pick, albeit with a couple of caveats.

The first is that while Intel has been lauded for making strides with their software support, they're still playing catchup to Nvidia and A.M.D. Based on techspots 250 game mega-test, we're saying that Intel is problematic 13% of the time, compared to 2% of the time for A.M.D.[www.techspot.com] One of the more common problems was resolved simply by disabling the processor's I.G.P.U. if present though.

The second is that it's about 20% weaker than the 4060 at ray tracing. However it holds a firm second place in this price range since everything A.M.D. has to offer is pathetic by means of comparison.

When we also consider the B580 is $50 cheaper, meaning the 4060 costs 20% more we're probably saying a 20% hit to ray tracing performance is a fairly valued sacrifice, especially since it performs about as good as an a770, meaning it's still about 10% stronger than an RTX 3060, at least allowing you to dabble in ray tracing somewhat. It's closest competition in ray tracing from A.M.D. is the 7700 XT. If you're playing at 1080p the 7700 XT is a bit better at ray tracing, but not by enough to justify the $150 price difference. If you're playing at 1440p the B570 actually beats the 7700 XT in ray tracing

B580 if you are drinking cool aid and think Intel is not going to axe their dgpu branch after celestial

Intel already had the codename Druid when they made the Arc announcment, but more importantly who cares if they even get so far as to make Celestial at this point? We're considering a hot off the presses Battlemage card.

The only thing you might worry about is them prematurely dropping driver support and optimizing for future games, but there are a couple of things to consider about that.

The first is that present generation A.M.D. and Nvidia cards are likely close to their maximum maturity anyway given that new cards are on the horizon, so those cards aren't likely going to be seeing much in the way of updates anyway.

The second they're still going to have to make their Xe based I.G.P.Us., and even if they fire their G.P.U. hardware engineers, they're probably not dropping their software department branch, so I'd anticipate Battlemage cards getting a decent enough service life until it's time to maybe consider upgrading again, and when you do you it's not like buying Arc Battlemage today means you have to buy Arc Gladiator the next time you upgrade your graphics card.

Intel's usually good with customer support, and although the raptor lake mishaps might shatter faith in the company as a whole, since C.P.Us. are their main product line, they can't really afford to lose more of their customer base's good faith. Even when they have it, they're losing C.P.U. market share to A.M.D. at an alarming rate so they need a recovery. Trust is easy to lose but hard to regain, so one more major failure on Intel's part so soon to its last would probably represent the point of no return on its way to an extinction event for the company.

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

Also if you can afford a 4060 then you can afford a 6700-XT which is around 10 bucks more, still offers 12GB VRAM, but performs at least 10-15% faster than both the B580 and 4060.

First, last I checked it was closer to $20 more (although that might've been a 6750 XT). More importantly the techspot numbers[www.techspot.com] tell a different story with the 12 game mean average famerates being 77 vs 75 at 1080p and 57 vs 54 at 1440p. Techspot doesn't give 4k numbers, but that's probably because 4k native probably isn't viable at this price range in the first place, rendering any point to be made moot.

Granted, the B580's 1% lows are worse than the 6700 XT's at 1080p, but we're saying the 6700 XT is only about 5% stronger there, and it's also only one frame less than the 7800 xt, but if you're playing at 1440p, it beats all three of its competitors (4060, 6700 xt, 7600 xt) at 1% lows. Granted, it's only by a frame against the 6700 xt, but we're definitely saying a win is a win for the B580 considering that it's the cheaper card by a fairly significant amount relative to the price range.

The last figure we might consider is the expected performance floor, and in this regard, with Techspot's test suite of games, the B580 seems to perform the worst when compared to the 6700 XT when compared in 1080p Warhammer 40k: Space Marine 2, where it's 16% weaker.

However, $60 is roughly 19% of $310, and $70 is 22% roughly of 320, I'm probably going to say you're getting at least what you paid for.

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

B580 is better overall for the price and because it offers 4GB more VRAM, if the 4060 offered 12GB then that'd be another thing

Also if you can afford a 4060 then you can afford a 6700-XT which is around 10 bucks more, still offers 12GB VRAM, but performs at least 10-15% faster than both the B580 and 4060

At least with the B580 you can afford price/performance value, but you can't with the 4060 because it's just awful value in comparison to both, costs too much and doesn't offer as much memory which was stupid.

Actually in my country (Turkey) 6700-XT is expensive than both idk why. 6750x seems sitting at the same price with 4060 and B580. Also did Intel solved the driver issues with ray tracing?

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Trout:

B580 definitely. keep in mind that because intel is new to making GPUs their drivers are "emulating" DX9 and DX11 games. you might want to see if the B580 performs well in older games

It seems it MIGHT be an issue for older games but it still need more user-testing to confirm I guess

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Yhorm:

4060 if stability cuda and efficiency is important to you
6750xt if you want to game but don't care about quality control and drivers
B580 if you are drinking cool aid and think Intel is not going to axe their dgpu branch after celestial

funniest answer so far

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Tonepoet:

A.M.D. might announce an RX 8600 graphics card that would logically be sold at the same price point as a 4060 at C.E.S. on the sixth. It'd logically be a $300 card like the 7600 XT and the 4060.

Otherwise I'd go with the B580 as the obvious pick, albeit with a couple of caveats.

The first is that while Intel has been lauded for making strides with their software support, they're still playing catchup to Nvidia and A.M.D. Based on techspots 250 game mega-test, we're saying that Intel is problematic 13% of the time, compared to 2% of the time for A.M.D.[www.techspot.com] One of the more common problems was resolved simply by disabling the processor's I.G.P.U. if present though.

The second is that it's about 20% weaker than the 4060 at ray tracing. However it holds a firm second place in this price range since everything A.M.D. has to offer is pathetic by means of comparison.

When we also consider the B580 is $50 cheaper, meaning the 4060 costs 20% more we're probably saying a 20% hit to ray tracing performance is a fairly valued sacrifice, especially since it performs about as good as an a770, meaning it's still about 10% stronger than an RTX 3060, at least allowing you to dabble in ray tracing somewhat. It's closest competition in ray tracing from A.M.D. is the 7700 XT. If you're playing at 1080p the 7700 XT is a bit better at ray tracing, but not by enough to justify the $150 price difference. If you're playing at 1440p the B570 actually beats the 7700 XT in ray tracing

B580 if you are drinking cool aid and think Intel is not going to axe their dgpu branch after celestial

Intel already had the codename Druid when they made the Arc announcment, but more importantly who cares if they even get so far as to make Celestial at this point? We're considering a hot off the presses Battlemage card.

The only thing you might worry about is them prematurely dropping driver support and optimizing for future games, but there are a couple of things to consider about that.

The first is that present generation A.M.D. and Nvidia cards are likely close to their maximum maturity anyway given that new cards are on the horizon, so those cards aren't likely going to be seeing much in the way of updates anyway.

The second they're still going to have to make their Xe based I.G.P.Us., and even if they fire their G.P.U. hardware engineers, they're probably not dropping their software department branch, so I'd anticipate Battlemage cards getting a decent enough service life until it's time to maybe consider upgrading again, and when you do you it's not like buying Arc Battlemage today means you have to buy Arc Gladiator the next time you upgrade your graphics card.

Intel's usually good with customer support, and although the raptor lake mishaps might shatter faith in the company as a whole, since C.P.Us. are their main product line, they can't really afford to lose more of their customer base's good faith. Even when they have it, they're losing C.P.U. market share to A.M.D. at an alarming rate so they need a recovery. Trust is easy to lose but hard to regain, so one more major failure on Intel's part so soon to its last would probably represent the point of no return on its way to an extinction event for the company.

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

Also if you can afford a 4060 then you can afford a 6700-XT which is around 10 bucks more, still offers 12GB VRAM, but performs at least 10-15% faster than both the B580 and 4060.

First, last I checked it was closer to $20 more (although that might've been a 6750 XT). More importantly the techspot numbers[www.techspot.com] tell a different story with the 12 game mean average famerates being 77 vs 75 at 1080p and 57 vs 54 at 1440p. Techspot doesn't give 4k numbers, but that's probably because 4k native probably isn't viable at this price range in the first place, rendering any point to be made moot.

Granted, the B580's 1% lows are worse than the 6700 XT's at 1080p, but we're saying the 6700 XT is only about 5% stronger there, and it's also only one frame less than the 7800 xt, but if you're playing at 1440p, it beats all three of its competitors (4060, 6700 xt, 7600 xt) at 1% lows. Granted, it's only by a frame against the 6700 xt, but we're definitely saying a win is a win for the B580 considering that it's the cheaper card by a fairly significant amount relative to the price range.

The last figure we might consider is the expected performance floor, and in this regard, with Techspot's test suite of games, the B580 seems to perform the worst when compared to the 6700 XT when compared in 1080p Warhammer 40k: Space Marine 2, where it's 16% weaker.

However, $60 is roughly 19% of $310, and $70 is 22% roughly of 320, I'm probably going to say you're getting at least what you paid for.

This is the best answer with every info I think I can get so I want to thank you for your research first.

I used Intel cpus for my whole life and have to change to AMD after these raptorlake events and price/performance options. I still use GTX 1070 and it's actually still does nice job but have to upgrade anyway. RTX 4060 and B580 sits in the same price range while Intel card is newer but RTX 4060 is seems more stable then new released Intel cards.

I'm a student with very low budget so I have to be extremely careful with my already low budget. I still have 3 months to get the GPU for the computer, I already have the motherboard and SSD which means I still can wait for Intel user reviews and compare them to the RTX 4060 around March.

[r.linder]

Ursprungligen skrivet av birblord gaming:

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

B580 is better overall for the price and because it offers 4GB more VRAM, if the 4060 offered 12GB then that'd be another thing

Also if you can afford a 4060 then you can afford a 6700-XT which is around 10 bucks more, still offers 12GB VRAM, but performs at least 10-15% faster than both the B580 and 4060

At least with the B580 you can afford price/performance value, but you can't with the 4060 because it's just awful value in comparison to both, costs too much and doesn't offer as much memory which was stupid.

Actually in my country (Turkey) 6700-XT is expensive than both idk why. 6750x seems sitting at the same price with 4060 and B580. Also did Intel solved the driver issues with ray tracing?

If you want raytracing then you're in the wrong budget for it, basically need at least a 4070 or 7800-XT to get good enough RT performance, the low end just performs too poorly

[Corona Scurrae]

Ursprungligen skrivet av birblord gaming:

Ursprungligen skrivet av Yhorm:

4060 if stability cuda and efficiency is important to you
6750xt if you want to game but don't care about quality control and drivers
B580 if you are drinking cool aid and think Intel is not going to axe their dgpu branch after celestial

funniest answer so far

I'm here to give you the best suggestion that I think is going to give you the best value considering your price bracket. I can't recommend a b580 in good conscience. I know someone in retail and he told me their customers are returning their b580 because of problems with drivers etc.

If you can wait then wait until next gen because this generation is going to be incredibly underwhelming unless you opt for 70ti+. Next gen AMD will offer competition with udna and we can expect better value.

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

Ursprungligen skrivet av birblord gaming:

Actually in my country (Turkey) 6700-XT is expensive than both idk why. 6750x seems sitting at the same price with 4060 and B580. Also did Intel solved the driver issues with ray tracing?

If you want raytracing then you're in the wrong budget for it, basically need at least a 4070 or 7800-XT to get good enough RT performance, the low end just performs too poorly

Actually in some tests Intel ARC GPUs really perform well in Ray tracing, sitting between in 4060 and 4060ti

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av Yhorm:

Ursprungligen skrivet av birblord gaming:

funniest answer so far

I'm here to give you the best suggestion that I think is going to give you the best value considering your price bracket. I can't recommend a b580 in good conscience. I know someone in retail and he told me their customers are returning their b580 because of problems with drivers etc.

If you can wait then wait until next gen because this generation is going to be incredibly underwhelming unless you opt for 70ti+. Next gen AMD will offer competition with udna and we can expect better value.

You are right about that driver issue and I really don't want to take that risk. However, I don't know if I can afford the newer generation of cards released by nVidia and AMD. So the best thing to do is to wait them to release

[r.linder]

Ursprungligen skrivet av birblord gaming:

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

If you want raytracing then you're in the wrong budget for it, basically need at least a 4070 or 7800-XT to get good enough RT performance, the low end just performs too poorly

Actually in some tests Intel ARC GPUs really perform well in Ray tracing, sitting between in 4060 and 4060ti

I wouldn't classify them as "performing well" with raytracing when all of those cards struggle to get anywhere near 60 FPS unless you drop the settings down to medium (which defeats the point of going for RT if you're going to downgrade other graphics settings), but even then, you're not getting good performance in some games with raytracing settings unless you have at least a 3070.

People on that tight of a budget should just forget about it because it's only going to be a disappointment unless you have an overkill GPU that can handle it.

[birblord gaming]

Ursprungligen skrivet av r.linder:

Ursprungligen skrivet av birblord gaming:

Actually in some tests Intel ARC GPUs really perform well in Ray tracing, sitting between in 4060 and 4060ti

I wouldn't classify them as "performing well" with raytracing when all of those cards struggle to get anywhere near 60 FPS unless you drop the settings down to medium (which defeats the point of going for RT if you're going to downgrade other graphics settings), but even then, you're not getting good performance in some games with raytracing settings unless you have at least a 3070.

People on that tight of a budget should just forget about it because it's only going to be a disappointment unless you have an overkill GPU that can handle it.

Will getting a 3070 worth the buck? Or should I go with 4060 if that's the case in here