Header Ads Widget

Intel Arc A580 graphics card showed very strange results in Ashes of the Singularity gaming tests

Intel Arc A580 graphics card showed very strange results in Ashes of the Singularity gaming tests

Fresh performance data of Intel Arc A580 desktop graphics card appeared in Ashes of the Singularity gaming test database.
It's not the first time this model has been noted there.
Last month the card was tested with graphic API Vulkan.
In a fresh test, the novelty was tested using DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 graphics APIs.
The results turned out to be ambiguous.Image source: IntelNow Intel has disclosed the technical specifications of the Arc A580.
The gas pedal is built on the ACM-G10 graphics chip, which includes 24 Xe cores (3072 FP32 blocks), 24 ray tracing blocks, and 384 XMX matrix engines.
The declared GPU frequency is 1700 MHz.
It has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 16 GHz effective bandwidth, 256-bit bus bandwidth and 512 GB/s bandwidth.
According to Intel, Arc Alchemist graphics cards are best optimized for DirectX 12 games, with Vulkan APIs offering slightly worse performance.
Performance in games based on old DirectX 11 will be the worst.
It is interesting that in recent gaming test Ashes of the Singularity our Arc A580 showed mediocre performance not only in DirectX 11 mode, but also with DirectX 12 API.
Its performance was significantly worse than when using Vulkan API.
In all cases the game test was run at 1080p resolution with average image quality settings.
When using Vulkan, the card scored 9,300 points with an average frame rate of 95 FPS.
Intel Arc A580 in Vulkin API modeThe card scored 2,800 points in DirectX 11 mode with an average frame rate of 30.6 FPS.
In DirectX 12 mode, the card scored 6,600 points and 68.6 FPS.
It is interesting that in DX11/12 mode it was worse than entry level Arc A380.
Intel Arc A580 in DirectX 11 API modeIntel Arc A580 in DirectX12 modeThe below is a performance comparison table with other graphics cards provided by Tom's Hardware.There may be several reasons for such strange results.
Maybe the CPU in the system used to test the Arc A580 is so severely limiting the performance that the GPU, which should be three times faster than the Arc A380, ends up being slower.
Another reason could be the lack of optimization of its graphics driver or the disabled Resizable BAR (ReBAR) feature, without which the performance of Arc video cards drops significantly.
Another assumption is that the Arc A580 tested, which for some reason has an RI suffix in its name, is a mobile version of a power-limited graphics card.
It's also possible that it's not a full-fledged desktop Arc A580, and someone tricked the test into mistaking another graphics card for a desktop model.

Post a Comment

0 Comments