ASRock Arc B570 Challenger OC

[W1zzard]

The new Intel Arc B570 "Battlemage" is one of the most affordable graphics cards on the market that can still handle 1080p at maximum details. ASRock's B570 Challenger OC is a factory-overclocked custom-design variant that comes with a dual slot cooler that still runs whisper-quiet.

Show full review

 

[wolf]

At this price you might as well take the B580 when it's in stock. Linear drop with price and perf, I'd happily pay the difference for the more powerful one.

 

[jak_2456]

I'm very glad that Intel is back in the affordable GPU game. The B570 looks very compelling since it's close to the performance of the 4060 but around $70 cheaper.

 

[GenericUsername2001]

Any thoughts on doing a test of the B570 & B580 vs say the Geforce 4060 & Radeon 7600 with a more modest CPU? A lot of testing going on other sites is showing that the B580 looks to have some sort of driver overhead issue, and when paired with something like a Ryzen 5600 the Intel card end up falling behind the AMD & Nvidia ones in several games where previously the Intel card was leading when using a high end CPU. That seems pretty important, since very few people will want to pair a budget card like this with a top end CPU; budget & older CPUs will be much more common for those GPU shopping in that $200 to $300 price range.

 

[csendesmark]

LOL, it looks like the fans have only 2 option, On, and OFF

On the con regarding the PCIe 8×, I don't see any issue.
The games which the owners will run will with this budget GPU have minimal impact , maybe measurable by testing, but un noticeable by gamers.

 

[Eva01Master]

@W1zzard On the second paragraph of the conclusion you're speaking about the Sparkle version, even though this is the ASRock's article, is it meant to be this way? (English is not my first language, my apologies).

 

[notanin]

> Intel is aware of the situation, and it seems they are confident that it can be fixed. They provided the following statement: "We are aware of reports of performance sensitivity in some games when paired with older generation processors and we are investigating."

This is not the first time they have made such claims. They were also confident about fixing gaming performance issues with the latest CPUs and even reported it as resolved. Nothing actually improved.

The performance issues with older CPUs is an elephant in the room. Cannot recommend this GPU at this point, especially since it’s unlikely anyone would pair it with a 9800X3D.

 

[W1zzard]

@W1zzard On the second paragraph of the conclusion you're speaking about the Sparkle version, even though this is the ASRock's article, is it meant to be this way? (English is not my first language, my apologies).

Fixed. The 2600 MHz was still correct, guess that drew my attention (and the percentage math)

 

[HD64G]

> Intel is aware of the situation, and it seems they are confident that it can be fixed. They provided the following statement: "We are aware of reports of performance sensitivity in some games when paired with older generation processors and we are investigating."

This is not the first time they have made such claims. They were also confident about fixing gaming performance issues with the latest CPUs and even reported it as resolved. Nothing actually improved.

The performance issues with older CPUs is an elephant in the room. Cannot recommend this GPU at this point, especially since it’s unlikely anyone would pair it with a 9800X3D.

That problem is the driver development lessons that cannot be learned without years of trial and error. Intel is many years behind in that aspect and 2 gens behind in hardware. Not possible to succeed, especially now with their financial problems that force them to push all their money on the cpu side of them due to much more money lost or gained in that sector (especially OEMs & server).

Also, the real price is higher than the MSRP due to constraints in stock. Soft-launch products more than anything else. Kudos that they tried but not any real effect in the GPU market.

 

[bug]

Not much to say about these except the obvious slow card is slow.
They look good on the price/perf front, but that may change once RDNA4 lands.

 

[mb194dc]

It needs to be tested in a rig with a CPU that would go with a $230 graphics card... I doubt there's a going to be a single rig in the real world using a 9800x3d with this card...

Performance will be totally different (much worse?) with a much weaker CPU? which is how the card will actually be used 99.999% of the time.

 

[Lew Zealand]

It needs to be tested in a rig with a CPU that would go with a $230 graphics card... I doubt there's a going to be a single rig in the real world using a 9800x3d with this card...

Performance will be totally different (much worse?) with a much weaker CPU? which is how the card will actually be used 99.999% of the time.

How many games will it be "totally different (much worse?)" in and with what CPUs? People love posting the Spiderman results where the B580 performance craters because it's worst example by far. Is it indicative of performance in other games? By definition: No.

There's an overhead problem in some games and not others, and performance in the compromised ones is still pretty good though behind the 4060 and 7600. And it's ahead of the 7600 and 4060 in others. That's not "totally different". Comes down to how much do you want to pay and how prevalent do you think the overhead issue is/will become?

 

[notanin]

That problem is the driver development lessons that cannot be learned without years of trial and error. Intel is many years behind in that aspect and 2 gens behind in hardware. Not possible to succeed, especially now with their financial problems that force them to push all their money on the cpu side of them due to much more money lost or gained in that sector (especially OEMs & server).

Also, the real price is higher than the MSRP due to constraints in stock. Soft-launch products more than anything else. Kudos that they tried but not any real effect in the GPU market.

Right, I was not trying to bash them in any way. Would be terrific if they indeed fully resolve this issue and we get a great value card.

> There's an overhead problem in some games and not others, and performance in the compromised ones is still pretty good though behind the 4060 and 7600. And it's ahead of the 7600 and 4060 in others. That's not "totally different".

The difference here is "awesome deal at this price point, grab it!" vs "you'd better check if your games run well (god forbid if you play Spiderman), another card could be a better option". I'd say quite a different result.

 

[Wasteland]

How many games will it be "totally different (much worse?)" in and with what CPUs? People love posting the Spiderman results where the B580 performance craters because it's worst example by far. Is it indicative of performance in other games? By definition: No.

There's an overhead problem in some games and not others, and performance in the compromised ones is still pretty good though behind the 4060 and 7600. And it's ahead of the 7600 and 4060 in others. That's not "totally different". Comes down to how much do you want to pay and how prevalent do you think the overhead issue is/will become?

View attachment 380251

Yeah after watching/reading a few analyses on this topic, I can't help feeling that the issue is overblown. Yes, B580 loses more performance than its AMD/Nvidia competitors when you downgrade the CPU, but the competing products do lose performance too. It isn't a night/day difference in the general case; it just lowers the relative value proposition for Intel from "great" to "just ok." I would still buy a B580 if my budget were in the ~$250 tier. The extra VRAM is a pretty big deal, particularly if you're interested in older games, which tend to benefit substantially from texture mods.

Here Intel ironically benefits from its reliance on ReBAR. Thanks to that long-standing wrinkle, consumers already knew (or should have been told) not to pair Intel GPUs with really old CPUs.

I'm more annoyed by the idle power issue. Intel still has some work to do, but they're gaining ground at an astonishing rate.

 

[lexluthermiester]

This card seems to be a very good 1080p value offering. Rebar is only an issue for systems that don't have it.

 

[Garrus]

State of the market is rough. Imo this is too slow for modern gaming. So is the RTX 4060.

Wait for the 5060 I guess.

I picked up some used <$200 USD RTX 3060 Tis for my two friends instead.

 

[lexluthermiester]

State of the market is rough. Imo this is too slow for modern gaming. So is the RTX 4060.

You missed the point of your own point. These cards will do well because of the sluggish economy. People want to game and not spend a lot to do it. This card is an excellent 1080p entry level GPU.

 

[bug]

This card seems to be a very good 1080p value offering. Rebar is only an issue for systems that don't have it.

RDNA4 may have something to say about this price point...

 

[Dirtdog]

You missed the point of your own point. These cards will do well because of the sluggish economy. People want to game and not spend a lot to do it. This card is an excellent 1080p entry level GPU.

When paired with a Ryzen 5600 it struggles to keep up with an RTX 4060 and is often significantly behind. The RTX 4060 is the same price or cheaper. There is no good reason for anyone to buy this when they can get an nvidia card which will just work well with every game, new or old.

 

[hsew]

Any thoughts on doing a test of the B570 & B580 vs say the Geforce 4060 & Radeon 7600 with a more modest CPU? A lot of testing going on other sites is showing that the B580 looks to have some sort of driver overhead issue, and when paired with something like a Ryzen 5600 the Intel card end up falling behind the AMD & Nvidia ones in several games where previously the Intel card was leading when using a high end CPU. That seems pretty important, since very few people will want to pair a budget card like this with a top end CPU; budget & older CPUs will be much more common for those GPU shopping in that $200 to $300 price range.

I'd vouch for any one of the following:

Core i5 9600
Core i3 9300
Ryzen 5 2600(X)
Ryzen 3 2300X

These platforms are nearly 7 years old, and would most likely be running 560, 570, 580, 1050, 1060, 1650, 1660, or 2060 GPUs. They'd be prime suspects for an upgrade. I don't believe just about anybody on a newer platform, like an R5 5600 or i5 10500, would be interested in upgrading from a 2060, 2070, 5600 or 5700 class GPU to a B570/B580.

I can't imagine pairing a sub $300 GPU with a new CPU above $200 for gaming. Budget machines would be even stingier on the CPU than the CPU.


But going forward, opting for a 7600/13400 for a new build low/mid-range build benchmark would be great. I'd lean more towards AMD since Intel can't seem to figure out CPUs anymore.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

When paired with a Ryzen 5600 it struggles to keep up with an RTX 4060 and is often significantly behind. The RTX 4060 is the same price or cheaper. There is no good reason for anyone to buy this when they can get an nvidia card which will just work well with every game, new or old.

Don't know where you are, but the 4060 is still $300 and up in the US. At Intel's suggested pricing, I'll take the ARC any day of the week.

 

[R0H1T]

Intel is many years behind in that aspect and 2 gens behind in hardware.

Come on, that's a bit of an exaggeration. Intel's behind in "dGPU" experience, but otherwise they have more experience than probably Nvidia & AMD.

 

[Dirtdog]

Don't know where you are, but the 4060 is still $300 and up in the US. At Intel's suggested pricing, I'll take the ARC any day of the week.

Europe. Like with the B580, outside the US the nvidia cards are not more expensive. In any case, is it worth saving a small amount of money to buy a card which has hit and miss drivers, when the nvidia ones will be guaranteed to work with any game. Seems penny wise, pound foolish to me. (Not to mention the terrible idle power consumption.)

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Now they just need to supply BM in sufficient quantities so as to drive down prices on comparable AMD cards. If the RX 7600 came down to $200, I’d buy it, but right now they are closer to $260. Same for the x700 series.

It needs to be tested in a rig with a CPU that would go with a $230 graphics card... I doubt there's a going to be a single rig in the real world using a 9800x3d with this card...

Performance will be totally different (much worse?) with a much weaker CPU? which is how the card will actually be used 99.999% of the time.

Yeah, I’d be curious to try one on my Ivy E setup (I have a ReBAR bios mod I can use), but from what I gather, the Intel cards need the much newer CPUs to perform well. I’d rather just buy a 6650, 6700, 7600, or 7700 and see how it goes as opposed to buying a whole new rig. It’s honestly not that bad with just a 5600XT right now.

 

[sLowEnd]

The B570 is priced way too close to the B580 IMO. Might as well just skip a sandwich and fork out a bit more for the B580.