I'm not convinced. The latest Battlemage benchmarks I've seen put the B580 at the same performance as the RTX 4060 (which is a two years old entry-level card) but with 50% more power consumption (80W vs 125W average). It's good to have more than one open source supporting graphics vendor, but I don't think Nvidia is losing any sleep over Intel's GPU offerings.

▲

throwawaythekey 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

Battlemage had the best perf/% and most the driver issues from Alchemist had been ironed out. Another generation or two of steady progress and intel have a big winner on their hands.

Intel's foundry costs are probably competitive with nvidia too - nvidia has too much opportunity cost if nothing else.

▲

ComputerGuru 7 days ago | parent [-]

What is performance per percent?

	▲	purpleflame1257 7 days ago \| parent [-]
		It was a typo for $. The Arc B580 competed with the 4060 at 50 dollars less MSRP and 4GB more vram

▲

imiric 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The B580 was released in December 2024, and the 4060 in May 2023. So not quite a two year difference.

While it doesn't quite compete at performance and power consumption, it does at price/performance and overall value. It is a $250 card, compared to the $300 of the 4060 at launch. You can still get it at that price, if there's stock, while the 4060 hovers around $400 now. It's also a 12GB card vs the 8GB of the 4060.

So, sure, this is not competitive at the high-end segment, but it's remarkable what they've accomplished in just a few years, compared to the decades that AMD and NVIDIA have on them. It's definitely not far fetched to assume that the gap would only continue to close.

Besides, Intel is not only competing at GPUs, but APUs, and CPUs. Their APU products are more performant and efficient than AMD's (e.g. 140V vs 890M).

▲

bogwog 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is very short-sighted. The cards are improving, which can't really be said about AMD, the only other potential threat to Nvidia. It's also well known that Nvidia purposefully handicaps their consumer cards to avoid cannibalizing their enterprise cards. That means that the consumer market at least is not as efficient/optimal as it could be, so a competitor actually trying to compete (unlike AMD, apparently) should be able to do that without even having to out-innovate Nvidia or anything like that. Just get close on compute performance, but offer more VRAM or cheaper multi-gpu setups.

	▲	fluoridation 6 days ago \| parent [-]
		>cheaper multi-gpu setups Nah, nobody cares about that. Even in their heyday, SLI and CrossFire barely made sense technologically. That market is basically non-existent. There's more people now wanting to run multiple GPUs for inference than there ever were who were interested in SLI, and those people can mix and match GPUs as they like.

▲

HDThoreaun 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

nvidia's margins are over 80% for datacenter products. If Intel can produce chips with enough vram and performance on par with nvidia from 2 years ago at 30% margins theyd steal a lot of business, if they can figure out the cuda side of things.