Intel's Arc graphics cards have quietly become excellent | Digital Trends
www.digitaltrends.com
Intel's Arc A770 and A750 were decent, if imperfect, GPUs at launch, but they've massively improved since then.

"Intel’s Arc A770 and A750 were decent at launch, but over the past few months, they’ve started to look like some of the best graphics cards you can buy if you’re on a budget. Disappointing generational improvements from AMD and Nvidia, combined with high prices, have made it hard to find a decent GPU around $200 to $300 — and Intel’s GPUs have silently filled that gap.

They don’t deliver flagship performance, and in some cases, they’re just straight-up worse than the competition at the same price. But Intel has clearly been improving the Arc A770 and A750, and although small driver improvements don’t always make a splash, they’re starting to add up."

  • mantaba@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    17·
    1 year ago

    Sounds unfair to criticize an article from 2021 for not being up to date with the ever changing metrics of Userbenchmark.

    The point stands. Userbenchmark has announced and made changes to their own metric calculations because Ryzen Cpus were getting better scores than intel. It has a very clear anti-AMD stance that is clear on the written reviews and linked videos like the one in your screenshot.

    Just from this comparison, I have no clue how Userbenchmark achieved the 8% given the values they’re posting below. 8% is still also reasonably below what other reviewers posted at the time. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-5600-xt-pulse/27.html https://www.techspot.com/review/1974-amd-radeon-rx-5600-xt/

    This just to say that they are pretty clearly biased and do not shy away from altering their metrics to favour one product over the other.

      • mantaba@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        16·
        1 year ago

        You attacked the credibility of the article just for having some out of date information. Just because something they reference is out of date, does not mean the article is less relevant. It’s still things that happened and they should weight on how you view Userbenchmark as a source of information.

        I am replying to your userbenchmark defense. Of course the articles I posted have nothing to do with the 3060ti, they were meant to source my claim that even the 8% on your posted screenshot doesn’t seem like an accurate evaluation when comparing these 2 GPUs