Flopped CPUs & GPUs: AMD FX, RX Vega, the Pentium 4 and now Intel Arc?

0
165

The list of CPUs and GPUs in recent history that have been a flop is long and includes the Bulldozer and Piledriver processors from the AMD FX and Radeon RX Vega series, which have been released since 2011 aka “Poor Volta” from 2017 and the Pentium 4. But does Intel's Arc 1.0 (“Alchemist”) have the potential?

Table of contents

  1. 1 Flopped CPUs & GPUs
    1. AMD FX (“Bulldozer” and “Piledriver”)
    2. AMD Radeon RX Vega (“Vega 10” and “Vega 20”)
    3. Intel Pentium 4 (“Netburst architecture”)
    4. Intel Arc (“Alchemist”) and Xe HPG
  2. Participation is expressly desired
    1. The Last Twenty Sunday Questions

Floped CPUs & GPUs

Of course, the four CPU and GPU series presented here and thus brought to mind once again can also be seen as representative of many other IT and hardware flops, but due to their level of awareness they are still used today as prominent examples of “flops ” and disappointing hardware.

AMD FX (“Bulldozer” and “Piledriver”)

The title of the editorial test of October 12, 2011 is sufficient to describe the entry of the new modular Bulldozer architecture, manufactured in 32 nm, into the desktop.

  • AMD Bulldozer: “A Black Wednesday”

The up to 4-module strong design, for which AMD had to pay back 12.1 million US dollars to CPU buyers eight years later, turned out to be absolutely disadvantageous, especially in games.

AMD FX-81XX (“Bulldozer”) Model Modules/Threads Clock Turbo clock L2/L3 cache TDP Price FX-8150 4/8 3.6 GHz 3 .9/4.2 GHz 8/8 MB 125 watts 245$ FX-8120 4/8 3.1 GHz 3.4/4.0 GHz 8/8 MB 95/125 watts 205$ FX-6100 3/6 3 .3GHz 3.6/3.9GHz 6/8MB 95W 165$ FX-4100 2/4 3.6GHz 3.7/3.8GHz 4/8MB 95W 115$

In this discipline, the AMD FX-8150 with 4 modules and 8 threads had to admit defeat to its direct predecessor, the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition (test) aka Thuban.< /p>

AMD FX-8150 to 5.0 GHz with one module
AMD FX-8150 at 4.6 GHz with all cores

Not even the top model of the Bulldozer generation could match the top dogs Intel Core i7-2600K and i5-2500K aka Sandy Bridge and even their predecessors. The direct successor, AMD Vishera, wasn't convincing either, as the comparison between Bulldozer and Piledriver showed at the time.

Final performance rating

  • with applications and games in low resolution:
    • Intel Core i7-980X, 6C/12T, 3.33GHz, 32nm, Turbo, SMT96.3
    • Intel Core i7-2600K, 4C /8T, 3.40GHz, 32nm, Turbo, SMT92.6
    • Intel Core i5-2500K, 4C/4T, 3.30GHz, 32nm, Turbo86.1< /li>
    • Intel Core i5-2400, 4C/4T, 3.10GHz, 32nm, Turbo81.0
    • Intel Core i7-960, 4C/8T, 3.20GHz, 45nm , Turbo, SMT75.7
    • Intel Core i7-870, 4C/8T, 2.93 GHz, 45 nm, Turbo, SMT74.4
    • AMD FX-8150, 4M/8T, 3.60 GHz, 32 nm, Turbo72.6
    • AMD FX-8150, 4M/8T, 3.60 GHz, 32 nm68.7
    • Intel Core i5-760, 4C/4T, 2.80 GHz, 45 nm, Turbo66.5
    • AMD Phenom II X6 1100T, 6C/6T, 3.30GHz, Turbo, 890FX65,4
    • AMD Phenom II X6 1100T, 6C/6T, 3.30GHz, Turbo, 990FX64 ,8
    • AMD Phenom II X6 1100T, 6C/6T, 3.30 GHz, 990FX63,9
    • AMD FX-8150, 4M /8T @ 3.30GHz, 32nm, DDR3-133362.8
    • AMD Phenom II X6 1075T, 6C/6T, 3.00GHz, 45nm, Turbo61.7< /li>
    • AMD Phenom II X4 975, 4 cores, 3.60 GHz, 45 nm59.6
    • AMD FX-61×0, 3M/6T, 3.30GHz, 32nm, DDR3-133357.8
    • AMD FX-41×0, 2M/4T, 3.60GHz, 32nm , DDR3-133352.5
    • Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550, 4C/4T, 2.83 GHz, 45 nm52.3
    • AMD A8-3850, 4 cores, 2.90 GHz, 32 nm51,9
    • AMD Phenom II X4 840, 4 cores, 3.20 GHz, 45 nm50,2

Unit: percent

There was no question of “Legend reborn”, as AMD announced the bulldozer CPUs of the FX series, and the up to 5 GHz fast “crowbars” AMD FX-9590 (test) and FX-9370 were ultimately only up to 220 watts thirsty culmination of a more than disappointing CPU series. But how do you see it in retrospect?

Did the AMD FX CPUs disappoint you?

  • Yes
  • No
  • abstain (show result)

Please log in to vote!

AMD Radeon RX Vega (“Vega 10” and “Vega 20”)

During the official preview of the graphics cards of the AMD Vega generation, the manufacturer could not resist taking a dig at its big competitor Nvidia. The warning sign with the slogan “Poor Volta” in the teaser video was ultimately not to AMD's advantage and became a meme. At that time, the next generation of Nvidia was traded as Volta.

The “Poor Volta” swipe backfired for AMD and became a meme

It doesn't matter whether it's the Radeon RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 (test), which later became at least price/performance tips, or later the Radeon RX Vega VII (test) (which was simply too loud, too slow and too expensive): The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 and 1080 Ti as well as the successors GeForce RTX 2070, 2080 and 2080 Ti were almost always the better choice.

Performance rating

6 entries Edit Performance rating – 1,920 × 1,080 (FPS) Incoming charts All None

  • Assassin's Creed: Origins – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Call of Duty: WWII – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Destiny 2 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Elex – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • F1 2018 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Far Cry 5 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Final Fantasy XV – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Ghost Recon: Wildlands – 1920×1080: FPS, Average

    • li>

  • Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Jurassic World – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Kingdom Come: Deliverance – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Middle-earth: Shadow of War – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Monster Hunter World – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) – 1920×1080 : FPS, Average
  • Star Wars: Battlefront 2 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
  • Wolfenstein 2 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average

< ul class="chart__groups toggle-body-container" id="chart-groups-125804">

    • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE100.0
    • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE86.4
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE82.5
    • AMD Radeon VII74.4
    • Asus GeForce RTX 2070 Turbo71.0
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 FE66.1
    • AMD Radeon RX Vega 6465.1
    • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 FE62.0

      • li>

    • AMD Radeon RX Vega 5658.2
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 FE54,9
    • AMD Radeon RX 59043,2
    • AMD Radeon RX 58039.4
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 FE39.2< /li>
    • AMD Radeon RX 48037.5

    • Unit: percent 6 items Edit Performance Rating – 1,920 × 1,080 (frametimes) Input charts All None

    • Assassin's Creed: Origins – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th Percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Call of Duty: WWII – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Destiny 2 – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Elex – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile ( Frame times in FPS)
    • F1 2018 – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Far Cry 5 – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Final Fantasy XV – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • Ghost Recon: Wildlands – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Jurassic World – 1920 × 1080: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Kingdom Come: Deliverance – 1920×1080: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Middle-earth: Shadow of War – 1920×1080: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Monster Hunter World – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • Star Wars: Battlefront 2 – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • Wolfenstein 2 – 1,920 × 1,080: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE99.1
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE85.0
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE81.9

        • < li class="chart__row">AMD Radeon VII76.5

      • Asus GeForce RTX 2070 Turbo72.1
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 FE70.4
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 6469.3
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 5662.2
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 FE61,5
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 FE58,9
      • AMD Radeon RX 59045.0
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 FE42.4
      • AMD Radeon RX 58041,5
      • AMD Radeon RX 48039.4

    Unit: Percent 5 entries Edit Performance rating – 2560 × 1440 (FPS) Input charts All None

    • Assassin's Creed: Origins – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Call of Duty: WWII – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Destiny 2 – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Elex – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • F1 2018 – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Far Cry 5 – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Final Fantasy XV – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Ghost Recon: Wildlands – 2560×1440: FPS, Average

      • li>

    • Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Jurassic World – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Kingdom Come: Deliverance – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Middle-earth: Shadow of War – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Monster Hunter World – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) – 2560×1440 : FPS, Average
    • Star Wars: Battlefront 2 – 2560×1440: FPS, Average
    • Wolfenstein 2 – 2560×1440: FPS, Average

    < ul class="chart__groups toggle-body-container" id="chart-groups-125786">

    • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE100,0
    • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE81,4
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE75,6
    • AMD Radeon VII72.0
    • Asus GeForce RTX 2070 Turbo63.0
    • AMD Radeon RX Vega 6459.1
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 FE58.6
    • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 FE55.8

      • li>

    • AMD Radeon RX Vega 5650,4
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 FE48.0
    • AMD Radeon RX 59038.4
    • AMD Radeon RX 58034.9
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 FE34.5< /li>

    • Unit: percent 5 entries Edit Performance rating – 2,560 × 1,440 (frametimes) Inflow charts All None

    • Assassin's Creed: Origins – 2,560 × 1,440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
      • Call of Duty: WWII – 2560×1440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Destiny 2 – 2560×1440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Elex – 2,560 × 1,440: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • F1 2018 – 2,560 × 1,440: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
    • Far Cry 5 – 2560×1440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Final Fantasy XV – 2560×1440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Ghost Recon: Wildlands – 2560 × 1,440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice – 2,560 × 1,440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Jurassic World – 2,560 × 1,440: 99th percentile ( Frametimes in FPS)
    • Kingdom Come: Deliverance – 2560 × 1440: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Middle-earth: Shadow of War – 2560 × 1440: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Monster Hunter World – 2560 × 1440: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) – 2560×1440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Star Wars: Battlefront 2 – 2560×1440: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Wolfenstein 2 – 2,560 × 1,440: 99th percentile (frame times in FPS)
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE100.0
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE84.5

        • < li class="chart__row">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE80.9

      • AMD Radeon VII77.0
      • Asus GeForce RTX 2070 Turbo66.9
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 FE63.0
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 6462.5
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 FE57.4
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 5652.9
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 FE51,6
      • AMD Radeon RX 59039,8< /li>
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 FE36,7
      • AMD Radeon RX 58036.6

    Unit: percent 5 entries Edit Performance rating – 3,840 × 2,160 (FPS) Inflow charts All None

    • Assassin's Creed: Origins – 3,840 × 2160: FPS, Average
    • Call of Duty: WWII – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
    • Destiny 2 – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
    • Elex – 3840 × 2160: FPS, Average
    • F1 2018 – 3840 × 2160: FPS, Average
    • Far Cry 5 – 3840 × 2160: FPS, Average
    • Final Fantasy XV – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
    • Ghost Recon: Wildlands – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
    • Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice – 3840×2160: FPS, Average< /li>
    • Jurassic World – 3840×2160: FPS, average
    • Kingdom Come: Deliverance – 3840×2160: FPS, average
    • Middle-earth: Shadow of War – 3840× 2160: FPS, Average
    • Monster Hunter World – 3840 × 2160: FPS, Average
    • Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
    • Star Wars: Battlefront 2 – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
    • Wolfenstein 2 – 3840×2160: FPS, Average
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE100.0
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE @ OC85.8
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE @ OC81,1
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE78,7< /li>
      • AMD Radeon VII @ OC78.2
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE74.2
      • AMD Radeon VII @ UV72.1
      • AMD Radeon VII72.0 li>
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 @ OC64.7
      • Asus GeForce RTX 2070 Turbo60.9
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 6457.5
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 FE56,1
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 5650,2
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 FE46.0

    Unit: Percentage 5 items Edit Performance rating – 3,840 × 2,160 (frame times) Inflow Charts All None

    • Assassin's Creed: Origins – 3,840 × 2,160: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Call of Duty: WWII – 3,840 × 2,160: 99th Percentile ( Frametimes in FPS)
    • Destiny 2 – 3840 × 2160: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Elex – 3840 × 2160: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)

      • < li>F1 2018 – 3,840 × 2,160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)

    • Far Cry 5 – 3,840 × 2,160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Final Fantasy XV – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Ghost Recon: Wildlands – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Jurassic World – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Kingdom Come: Deliverance – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Middle-earth: Shadow of War – 3840 × 2160: 99th Percentile (Frametimes in FPS)
    • Monster Hunter World – 3840×2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12) – 3840×2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Star Wars: Battlefront 2 – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
    • Wolfenstein 2 – 3840 × 2160: 99th percentile (frametimes in FPS)
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE100,0
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE @ OC86,8
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE @ OC81,7
      • Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 FE79,2
      • AMD Radeon VII @ OC75.9
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE75.5
      • AMD Radeon VII @ UV70.1
      • AMD Radeon VII70.0
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 @ OC64,9
      • Asus GeForce RTX 2070 Turbo60,1
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 FE56,5
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 6456.2
      • AMD Radeon RX Vega 5649.4
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 FE46.6

    Unit: percent

    On February 7, 2019, ComputerBase therefore also attested “Who simply only Gaming and don't want to manually optimize the graphics card first shouldn't think twice and go for the GeForce RTX 2080 – Nvidia undoubtedly has the more rounded package, which works better for most gamers, but how do you see it?

    Is AMD Radeon RX Vega been a disappointment for you?

    • Yes
    • No
    • Abstain (Show result )

    Please log in to vote!

    Intel Pentium 4 (“Netburst Architecture”)

    The first Pentium 4 series processors, codenamed Willamette, ran at 1.4 and 1.5 GHz and were released in November 2000. The P4 processors, which later appeared in the Northwood, Prescott and Cedar Mill evolution stages, were an emergency measure by Intel and mostly lost out compared to the AMD Athlon.

    Also the editors accompanied the less than glorious evolution of the Pentium 4 with extensive tests and the titles alone speak for themselves.

    • Intel's Prescott was a step backwards through progress< /li>
    • Intel's Pentium 4 Prescott was also a flop with 3.4 GHz
    • The Northwood Celeron was also a flop with 3.0 GHz
    • The Pentium M made the Pentium 4 hot as hell

    The Pentium 4 has had the reputation of being inefficient to this day, with the Prescott-type Pentium 4 Extreme Edition in particular breaking into completely new dimensions. The direct power saving comparison between the Pentium 4 EE and the Athlon XP as well as the Athlon 64 FX shows how superior AMD was at this point.

    Charts

      < li class="chartbundle-tabs__li" role="presentation">Consumption – Windows Desktop (idle)

    Consumption – Windows Desktop (Idle)

      • Athlon 64 2800+ (Clawh.-512) C'n'Q71
      • Athlon 64 2800+ (Clawh.-512)77
      • Athlon 64 3400+ (Clawhammer) C'n'Q77
      • Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton)84
      • Pentium 4 2.40C GHz (Northwood)86
      • Athlon XP 3200+ (Barton)87
      • Pentium 4 3.40GHz (Northwood)92
      • Pentium 4 EE 3.40GHz (Gallatin)93
      • Athlon 64 3400+ (Clawhammer)94
      • Athlon 64 FX-53 (Clawhammer)107
      • Pentium 4 2.80E GHz (Prescott)116
      • Pentium 4 3.40E GHz (Prescott)120

    Unit: Watt (W) Annual energy costs (idle)

      • Pentium 4 3.40E GHz (Prescott)210
      • Pentium 4 2.80E GHz (Prescott)203
      • Athlon 64 FX-53 (Clawhammer)187
      • Athlon 64 3400+ (Clawhammer)165
      • Pentium 4 EE 3, 40GHz (Gallatin)163
      • Pentium 4 3.40GHz (Northwood)161
      • Athlon XP 3200+ (Barton)152

        • li>

      • Pentium 4 2.40C GHz (Northwood)151
      • Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton)147
      • Athlon 64 2800+ (Clawh.-512)135
      • Athlon 64 3400+ (Clawhammer) C'n'Q135
      • Athlon 64 2800 + (Clawh.-512) C'n'Q124

    Unit: Euro energy costs per year (Seti)

      • Pentium 4 3.40E GHz (Prescott)347
      • Pentium 4 EE 3.40 GHz (Gallatin) 315
      • Pentium 4 2.80E GHz (Prescott)314
      • Pentium 4 3.40 GHz (Northwood)312

        • < li class="chart__row">Athlon 64 FX-53 (Clawhammer)298

      • Athlon XP 3200+ (Barton)270
      • Athlon 64 3400+ (Clawhammer)263
      • Pentium 4 2.40C GHz (Northwood)252
      • Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton)242
      • Athlon 64 2800+ (Clawh.-512)201

    Unit: EUR annual energy costs (full load)

      • Pentium 4 3.40E GHz (Prescott)447
      • Pentium 4 2.80E GHz (Prescott)412
      • Pentium 4 EE 3.40GHz (Gallatin)406
      • Pentium 4 3.40 GHz (Northwood)398
      • Athlon 64 FX-53 (Clawhammer)387
      • Athlon 64 3400+ (Clawhammer)352
      • Athlon XP 3200+ (Barton)352
      • Pentium 4 2.40C GHz (Northwood) 342
      • Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton)326
      • Athlon 64 2800+ (Clawh.-512)289

    Unit: Euro

    Only with the Core microarchitecture and the CPUs of the Intel Core Solo and Core Duo series as well as the successors Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad was Intel able to reverse the momentum and regain the lead. However, the Pentium 4 remains a very inglorious chapter for the manufacturer.

    Did the Pentium 4 and the Netburst architecture disappoint you?

    • Yes
    • No
    • Abstention (show result)

    Please log in to vote!

    Intel Arc (“Alchemist”) and Xe HPG

    Intel's first generation of graphics cards primarily aimed at gamers, the current Intel Arc (“Alchemist”) series based on Intel Xe HPG, is currently well on the way to joining the inglorious list of CPU and GPU flops and in one breath to be mentioned with AMD FX, Radeon RX Vega and the Intel Pentium 4.

    Raja Koduri, head of the Accelerated Computing Systems and Graphics (AXG) Group at Intel, After countless delays, and his team once again inspired such high expectations in January of this year that could hardly be fulfilled.

    It came as it had to: The Intel Arc A380, which the manufacturer has been selling “exclusively” on the Chinese market for some time and therefore only had to be imported indirectly by the editors, was only rarely able to convince in the test and faced AMD Ultimately, Radeon and Nvidia GeForce are not a country.

    • Intel Arc A380 review: A week between laughter and tears
    • Intel Arc A380 in the test: Further tests on AMD Ryzen, with OC and for fanstop

    Even if Intel promises more for the Arc A770 and Arc A750, which also do not even have an official release date in this country, the benchmarks of the Arc A380 already show where the journey will lead.

    Diagrams

    Edit Performancerating 1920 × 1080 – Rasterizer, AVG -FPS Input Charts All None

    • Age of Empires IV – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • DOTA 2 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average

      • li>

    • Diablo II Resurrected – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Elden Ring – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • F1 22 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Far Cry 6 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Fortnite – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • God of War – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Monster Hunter World – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Overwatch – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Rainbow Six Siege – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Resident Evil Village – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • The Witcher 3 – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • Tiny Tina's Wonderlands – 1920×1080: FPS, Average
    • < ul class="chart__group-body">
    • AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT100.0
    • AMD Radeon RX 640077.1
    • Nvidia GeForce GTX 165075.0
    • Intel Arc A380 (2.45 GHz)73.6
    • Intel Arc A380, non-rBAR (2.45 GHz)55.4

    Unit: Percent Edit Performance Rating 1920 × 1080 – Rasterizer, Percentile FPS < strong>Input Charts All None

    • Age of Empires IV – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • DOTA 2 – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile< /li>
    • Diablo II Resurrected – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Elden Ring – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • F1 22 – 1920× 1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Far Cry 6 – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Fortnite – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • God of War – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% Percentile
    • Monster Hunter World – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Overwatch – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Rainbow Six Siege – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Resident Evil Village – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
    • The Witcher 3 – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile< /li>
    • Tiny Tina's Wonderlands – 1920×1080: FPS, 1% percentile
      • AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT100.0
      • AMD Radeon RX 640078.0
      • Nvidia GeForce GTX 165074.5
      • Intel Arc A380 (2.45 GHz)68.0
      • Intel Arc A380, without rBAR (2.45 GHz)< /strong>48.5

    Unit: Percent Edit Performance Rating – Raytracing, AVG-FPS Input Charts All None

    • Raytracing – F1 22: FPS, Average
    • Raytracing – Lego Builder's Journey: FPS , Average
    • Raytracing – The Riftbreaker: FPS, Average
      • Radeon RX 6500 XT @ RT Aus100.0
      • Radeon RX 6400 @ RT Aus76 ,7
      • Radeon RX 6500 XT @ RT A63.1
      • Radeon RX 6400 @ RT A47.6
      • Arc A380 @ RT Out0.0
      • Arc A380 @ RT In0.0

    Unit: Percent Edit Performance Rating – Raytracing, Percentile -FPS Inflow charts All None

    • Raytracing – F1 22: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Raytracing – Lego Builder's Journey: FPS, 1% percentile
    • Raytracing – The Riftbreaker: FPS, 1% percentile
      • Radeon RX 6500 XT @ RT Aus100.0
      • Radeon RX 6400 @ RT Aus76.1

        • < li class="chart__row">Radeon RX 6500 XT @ RT A58.9

      • Radeon RX 6400 @ RT A44.7
      • Arc A380 @ RT Out0.0
      • Arc A380 @ RT In0.0

    Unit: percent

    The top models with AMD's RDNA 2 architecture and Nvidia Ampere are realistically out of reach and RDNA 3 and Nvidia Ada are already on the doorstep. But can the first generation based on Intel Xe HPG already be described as a real flop and be mentioned in the same breath as AMD FX, Radeon RX Vega and the Pentium 4?

    Would you already call Intel Arc (“Alchemist”) designate a flop?

    • Yes
    • No
    • Abstain (Show result)

    To Please log in to vote!

    Xe HPG² (“Battlemage”) and the third generation Xe HPG³ (“Celestial”) are intended as the successors to Intel Xe HPG (“Alchemist”), but Intel actually has a correspondingly long one Breath?

    Are you still convinced that Intel Xe HPG will become a serious third player in the gaming GPU segment? How do you see the future of Intel's GPU business? Will it eventually amount to HPC GPUs for servers and supercomputers?

    When will Intel Arc be on par with AMD Radeon and Nvidia GeForce?

    • Intel Arc with Intel Xe HPG (“Alchemist”)
    • Intel Arc with Intel Xe HPG² (“Battlemage”)
    • Intel Arc with Intel Xe HPG² (“Celestial”)
    • Intel Arc with Intel Xe Next (“Druid”)
    • Never, Intel Arc will be retired
    • Abstain (Show result)

    Please log in to vote!

    Participation is expressly desired

    The editors would be very happy to receive well-founded and detailed reasons for your decisions in the comments on the current Sunday question. If you have completely different favorites, please write it in the comments.

    Readers who have not yet participated in the last Sunday questions are welcome to do so. Exciting discussions are still going on in the ComputerBase forum, especially on the last surveys.

    The last twenty Sundays-questions

    • Alternative to Windows?: Have you tried Linux and how was the experience?
    • GPU history: Which graphics card is the legend under Legends?
    • Saving energy: (How) are you trying to reduce your power consumption?
    • CCleaner, TuneUp & Co.: Real system optimizers or just snake oil?
    • Sunday question: Should ComputerBase offer merchandise again?
    • Nutella, DDR5 and Retro: Sunday questions from the ComputerBase community
    • Duel of the game series: FIFA or Pro Evolution? Street Fighter or Tekken?
    • Sunday question: Which game console do you remember best?
    • Sunday question: How do you feel about crypto, tokens and blockchain?
    • Sunday question: JEDEC, XMP profile or rather real overclocking?
    • Sunday question: Which manufacturer offers good tools and which bad tools?
    • Sunday question: How do you see the current development of games?
    • WWW, Web 2.0 and Web3: How and when did you first go online yourself?
    • Sunday question: Do you optimize your gaming PCs with the help of OC and UV?
    • Sunday question: VR Gaming was, is and will remain something for the niche, right?
    • Sunday question: What is the name of your RGB boss?
    • Sunday question: Who else do Napster, KaZaA, eDonkey and eMule say anything about ?
    • Sunday question: Have you ever owned a graphics card with a dual GPU?
    • Sunday question: Which Sunday question would you like to have?
    • Sunday question: Is open source an alternative for you?
    • Sunday question: Windows Defender offers sufficient protection, doesn't it?

      • < li>Sunday question: Which architecture was more groundbreaking: Zen or Core?

    • Sunday question: PlayStation, Xbox or Nintendo?
    • Sunday question: The future is games from the cloud! Or maybe not?
    • Sunday question: Windows 11 or still Windows 10 and why?
    • Sunday question: Can Intel Arc already compete with AMD and Nvidia?
    • Sunday question : Ryzen 7000 or 13th Gen Core, who will win?

    Have ideas for an interesting Sunday question? The editors are always happy to receive suggestions and submissions.

    Was this article interesting, helpful or both? The editors are happy about any support from ComputerBase Pro and disabled ad blockers. More about ads on ComputerBase.