Intel's B570/B580 Battlemage and AMD Navi 44 RDNA 4 GPUs reportedly keep pace with the RTX 4060 Ti — AMD and Intel vie to capture the budget GPU market

News
By
published

No word on the exact performance numbers though.

Arc A770
(Image credit: Intel)

A new leak from hardware sleuth Golden Pig Upgrade Pack alleges that Intel's budget B570/B580 and AMD's Navi 44-based GPUs can beat Nvidia's existing RTX 4060 Ti, which currently retails for $400. Do note that the leaker has not mentioned the exact metrics used for this comparison, which could be gaming performance or synthetic workloads—who knows? So it is best to take this leak with a grain of salt, though remember that the leaker has a reputable track record.

The gaming industry has its eyes peeled for next-generation gaming GPUs from all three players in the market. Based on initial reports, Intel and AMD are readying only budget graphics cards this generation to expand their market share versus Nvidia, which currently dominates Steam's top 30 most used GPU list. A common gripe with current-gen GPUs is that they are too costly, lack VRAM, and offer almost nothing for the budget segment - or at least nothing new.

While Nvidia will almost certainly remain the rival to beat with its upcoming RTX 5090 offerings - rumored to employ the largest consumer GPU die since 2018 - AMD and Intel will only target the mainstream segment. The leaker claims that Intel's B580 and B570 GPUs - of which the B580 has been leaked extensively - and AMD's Navi 44 - possibly the RX 8600 - can outperform Nvidia's RTX 4060 Ti. For more context, the B580 LE was recently listed for $250, which is much cheaper than the 4060 Ti. Importantly, this conclusion was likely drawn based on synthetic tests, as the leaker didn't provide further clarification.

B580/B570 and Navi44 vs RTX 4060 Ti

(Image credit: Golden Pig Upgrade Pack via Weibo)

Admittedly, the RTX 4060 Ti is no high-end GPU and will probably be superseded by an RTX 5060/5060 Ti next year. Still, Nvidia completely ignored the sub $300 segment with its RTX 40 lineup, and if the RTX 50 series follows suit, this leak would make budget GPUs from AMD and Intel quite enticing.

Despite all the glitz and glam, leaker Everest alleges that AMD's budget Navi 44 GPUs will feature just 8GB of VRAM. A potential 16GB clamshell variant might be released later - akin to the RX 7600 XT. It seems that at launch, only Intel's B580 offerings will ship with 12GB of VRAM, but we suggest that users await independent reviews to determine if Battlemage's performance and drivers are up to the task.

According to leaks, Intel is eager to see Arc Battlemage hit shelves by the end of the year. GPUs from Nvidia and AMD will follow in January at CES 2025, though availability could be pushed back a few weeks.

See more GPUs News
Hassam Nasir
Hassam Nasir
Contributing Writer

Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.

19 Comments Comment from the forums
  • rluker5
    So would that put the B770 above the 4070ti?
    $350-$400 for a 2 slot one of those sounds pretty nice.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    Matching rasterization is fine, but can the new cards do better RT, AI or other new stuff better?
    Reply
  • 009Blastoise
    Gururu said:
    Matching rasterization is fine, but can the new cards do better RT, AI or other new stuff better?
    The thing about AI is that Nvidia has captured the market right now with their CUDA framework. Even if AMD has something better, they don't have the interfacing capabilities to match. I think they are working on that though, but it will take time.
    Reply
  • The Historical Fidelity
    Logically, it does not make sense what AMD is doing. Okay so their Navi 44 chip can outperform a $400 4060 Ti, okay well, the 5060 will likely beat a 4060 Ti, and if Nvidia sees what AMD is doing, they will price the 5060 to a point where all of Nvidia’s proprietary value-adds will make the 5060 a no-brainer choice. AMD will have to price their Navi 44 with little to no margin to gain market share like they want.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    The Historical Fidelity said:
    Logically, it does not make sense what AMD is doing. Okay so their Navi 44 chip can outperform a $400 4060 Ti, okay well, the 5060 will likely beat a 4060 Ti, and if Nvidia sees what AMD is doing, they will price the 5060 to a point where all of Nvidia’s proprietary value-adds will make the 5060 a no-brainer choice. AMD will have to price their Navi 44 with little to no margin to gain market share like they want.
    You seem to be implying that Nvidia has an intrinsic cost advantage vs. AMD. Is that truly what you believe and why? If there's no intrinsic cost advantage, then AMD can price more aggressively and still have margins (though perhaps smaller) intact.

    Apart from that, even if AMD's graphics business is less profitable, continuing to develop their GPUs is essential for their APUs and any intentions they have to stay in the console race or enter the phone SoC market (latest rumor).

    Also, they've announced plans to re-merge their client and server graphics IP as the UDNA architecture, which will succeed RDNA4. So, another way to look at RDNA4 is simply as a bridge generation.

    I'm interested in RDNA4, since it's rumored to improve mainly in the areas that held me back from buying a RDNA3 card - namely AI and ray tracing. Also, I'm not bothered by the lack of a flagship RDNA4 GPU, since I never was going to pay more than about $500ish, anyhow.

    P.S. Navi 44 is their entry-level GPU. Navi 48 is the one I'd likely buy, which is probably going to be about twice as powerful. Navi 41 is the flagship GPU they cancelled. I know it can be a little hard to follow. An AMD employee once explained to me that the "ones" digits of the chip numbers simply corresponds to the order in which they were developed, not the size or performance.
    Reply
  • The Historical Fidelity
    bit_user said:
    You seem to be implying that Nvidia has an intrinsic cost advantage vs. AMD. Is that truly what you believe and why? If there's no intrinsic cost advantage, then AMD can price more aggressively and still have margins (though perhaps smaller) intact.

    Apart from that, even if AMD's graphics business is less profitable, continuing to develop their GPUs is essential for their APUs and any intentions they have to stay in the console race or enter the phone SoC market (latest rumor).

    Also, they've announced plans to re-merge their client and server graphics IP as the UDNA architecture, which will succeed RDNA4. So, another way to look at RDNA4 is simply as a bridge generation.

    I'm interested in RDNA4, since it's rumored to improve mainly in the areas that held me back from buying a RDNA3 card - namely AI and ray tracing. Also, I'm not bothered by the lack of a flagship RDNA4 GPU, since I never was going to pay more than about $500ish, anyhow.

    P.S. Navi 44 is their entry-level GPU. Navi 48 is the one I'd likely buy, which is probably going to be about twice as powerful. Navi 41 is the flagship GPU they cancelled. I know it can be a little hard to follow. An AMD employee once explained to me that the "ones" digits of the chip numbers simply corresponds to the order in which they were developed, not the size or performance.
    Thank you for the summation, I have been following RDNA4 in detail and agree with you in concept.

    However, my argument is that Nvidia has enough money in their coffers to cover a low margin or even a loss-based counter and release direct competitors to NAVI 44 at the same price point, in which case, the majority of people would buy Nvidia for the value-add proprietary tech.

    Will Nvidia do this? I don’t know, a part of me thinks all they care about is AI and don’t care if AMD gains market share. But there is a very slight and unlikely chance Jenson says to heck with business practices, Im not going to relinquish gamer market share. IE Jenson has endless F U money and may use it in irrational ways and no shareholder will care because they are getting rich.

    Infinitesimally small chance but we will see.
    Reply
  • Ogotai
    Gururu said:
    but can the new cards do better RT
    what if you dont care about RT, cause nothing you play uses it at all, or the difference isnt worth the performance hit ?

    The Historical Fidelity said:
    he majority of people would buy Nvidia for the value-add proprietary tech.
    and of those dont matter to some one ? ie RT, DLSS and frame gen, then what ?

    right now, most cards are still over priced, nvidia and amd, so, if amd brings out cards that are much better priced, then they have now, for better performance, guess what some will buy ? i dony see nvidia lowering there prices, if at all, as amd could... nvidia, just likes to raise them.... IE, 4090s are STILL $2500+ here.4080 super ? $1300... for some reference, a 7900XTX, starts at $1300........
    Reply
  • bit_user
    The Historical Fidelity said:
    However, my argument is that Nvidia has enough money in their coffers to cover a low margin or even a loss-based counter and release direct competitors to NAVI 44 at the same price point, in which case, the majority of people would buy Nvidia for the value-add proprietary tech.
    I think this would be an unprecedented move, for the company.

    Also, as a de facto monopoly in the gaming GPU market, I think they'd risk getting slapped for abusing their market position to sell something at an artificially low price.
    Reply
  • P.Amini
    bit_user said:
    I think this would be an unprecedented move, for the company.

    Also, as a de facto monopoly in the gaming GPU market, I think they'd risk getting slapped for abusing their market position to sell something at an artificially low price.
    Plus in the current situation NVIDIA isn't very keen to sell GPUs to gamers as they can make more money by dedicating more resources including TSMC's time and capacity toward making more AI processors.
    Reply
  • The Historical Fidelity
    Ogotai said:
    what if you dont care about RT, cause nothing you play uses it at all, or the difference isnt worth the performance hit ?


    and of those dont matter to some one ? ie RT, DLSS and frame gen, then what ?

    right now, most cards are still over priced, nvidia and amd, so, if amd brings out cards that are much better priced, then they have now, for better performance, guess what some will buy ? i dony see nvidia lowering there prices, if at all, as amd could... nvidia, just likes to raise them.... IE, 4090s are STILL $2500+ here.4080 super ? $1300... for some reference, a 7900XTX, starts at $1300........
    IDK where you live, but here in the US a 7900xtx has been going for $819-$900 for a while now and the $1150-$1300 4080 Super is still far outselling the 7900 XTX.

    I should preface that I personally feel the same way about DLSS, frame gen, etc. as you. I also bought AMD for my current graphics card (6900xt) because I root for the underdog and AMD beat the king that generation. But with the reality of new games being so demanding (mostly due to lack of optimization) that DLSS and frame generation are required to get 60 fps, at monitor resolutions that aren’t from the turn of the millennium, even on the most powerful cards, yes Nvidia’s superior proprietary tech is a significant value-add to the majority of customers if they have to choose between similar price and performance cards.
    Reply