Intel Arc B580

[Neo_Morpheus]

TBH, visually games have barely gotten better looking over the past 4 years while being noticeably heavier in computing requirements. We've reached a point where more details and higher poly count are also becoming gimmicky because you only notice the difference when you stop and stare.

Oh yes, agreed.

We reached that point a little while ago and I lament that many devs continue going for the eye candy but seem to have forgotten that gameplay is that important.

RT could bring something new on the eye candy dept but not necessarily in gameplay , but so far, i havent seen anything that makes me want to ignore the performance hit.

Funny enough, going by that, it does helps justifying gpus like this one, given its msrp and performance.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Witcher 3 results are still incomparable to any other reviewers and give the appearance that this card is faster than it actually is.

W1zz tests The Witcher 3 in DX11 where most/all other places test it in the newer DX12 implementation. Both are valid but I prefer DX11 here to represent performance in older titles, many of which I'm still playing.

 

[forman313]

I still can't get my head around this:

• No support for DLSS (yes I know it's an NV exclusive, still doesn't change the fact that you can have it on one option and not on others)

I thought XeSS was about as good as DLSS. Why would one care about DLSS if the card supports a very similar version of it? Also the last TPU Frontpage poll only found 2.8% of TPU readers care about Upscaling and Frame Generation. I would almost say these technologies are all cons as we are being forced to pay for the development of something the vast majority of us don't want.

As long as NV GPU´s being reviewed get the equivalent comment; "Cons: No support for XeSS 2" it all works out in the end. However, awarding manufacturers who makes use of proprietary tech by penalizing those who do not, require a spoon fed explanation if I am to make any sense of it.

 

[Scattergrunt]

I thought XeSS was about as good as DLSS. Why would one care about DLSS if the card supports a very similar version of it? Also the last TPU Frontpage poll only found 2.8% of TPU readers care about Upscaling and Frame Generation. I would almost say these technologies are all cons as we are being forced to pay for the development of something the vast majority of us don't want.

It isnt, but neither is FSR to be fair (I'd still like to see both reach that point though.) Never take a poll at face value, even TPU's. Theres pros and cons to upscaling and frame gen, I think the positives outweigh the negatives if developers don't rely on them but were seeing a increased reliance on upscaling, frame gen, etc it seems.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

As long as NV GPU´s being reviewed get the equivalent comment; "Cons: No support for XeSS 2" it all works out in the end. However, awarding manufacturers who makes use of proprietary tech by penalizing those who do not, require a spoon fed explanation if I am to make any sense of it.

When there are swaths of games that support XeSS, but not DLSS, that will make sense. As it stands DLSS are widespread and the other two are spotty to MIS, so not having it is a major downside no non Nvidia GPUs.

Sucks, but the real world is not fair and open. Never has been.

 

[Dr. Dro]

When there are swaths of games that support XeSS, but not DLSS, that will make sense. As it stands DLSS are widespread and the other two are spotty to MIS, so not having it is a major downside no non Nvidia GPUs.

XeSS SR is all that's necessary, the other components (hardware-assisted frame generation and low-latency) are already available in NV hardware. You can even use NVIDIA Reflex low-latency in conjunction with a XeSS 1.3 or FSR 3 context. they're independent of one another.