Intel Arc A580 Review: New Budget Contender

One year after the A750 and A770, Arc A580 finally arrives.

Intel Arc A580 photos and unboxing
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Tom's Hardware Verdict

Intel's Arc A580 feels like a card from a previous generation, though at least it comes priced to move. But it's not much cheaper, or much slower, than the existing Arc A750, depending on street prices.

Reasons to buy

  • +

    Competitive pricing

  • +

    Good 1080p performance

  • +

    256-bit memory interface

  • +

    AV1, XeSS, and more

Reasons to avoid

  • -

    Uses quite a bit of power

  • -

    Noisy fans on the Sparkle card

  • -

    8GB of memory (not a huge issue for sub-$200)

  • -

    Driver concerns still linger

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

The Intel Arc A580 is finally here. First announced in 2022, we initially expected to see the card go on sale in early 2023. But then the months ticked by, pricing on the Arc A750 dropped, and we wondered if the final Intel Arc Alchemist desktop offering had simply been canned. Wonder no longer! It's here, and it still has some tricks that can help it compete against the best graphics cards.

Our sample for this review comes via Sparkle. There will also be Arc A580 cards from ASRock and Gunnir (the latter being limited to Asian markets). Maybe a few other graphics card manufacturers will start selling the A580 in the future, but Intel won't be making its own brand "Limited Edition" card — and it has discontinued the A770 LE and A750 LE.

Functionally, the Arc A580 looks very much like the A750 and A770 8GB. The key difference is that four additional Xe-Cores have been disabled, along with the accompanying shaders and XMX units. But it still has the full 256-bit memory interface, with the same 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM as the earlier Arc offerings. We can't help but wonder what a 12GB, 192-bit interface Arc might have looked like in terms of performance, but that's not to be, at least not on desktop.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Intel Arc A580 and Competitors Specifications
Graphics Card Arc A580 Arc A750 Arc A770 8GB Arc A770 16GB RTX 4060 RTX 3050 RTX 3060 RX 7600 RX 6600 RX 6700 10GB
Architecture ACM-G10 ACM-G10 ACM-G10 ACM-G10 AD107 GA106 Navi 33 Navi 23 Navi 22 Navi 22
Process Technology TSMC N6 TSMC N6 TSMC N6 TSMC N6 TSMC 4N Samsung 8N Samsung 8N TSMC N6 TSMC N7 TSMC N7
Transistors (Billion) 21.7 21.7 21.7 21.7 18.9 12 12 13.3 11.1 17.2
Die size (mm^2) 406 406 406 406 158.7 276 276 204 237 336
SMs / CUs / Xe-Cores 24 28 32 32 24 20 28 32 28 36
GPU Cores (Shaders) 3072 3584 4096 4096 3072 2560 3584 2048 1792 2304
Tensor / AI Cores 384 448 512 512 96 80 112 64 N/A N/A
Ray Tracing "Cores" 24 28 32 32 24 20 28 32 28 36
Boost Clock (MHz) 2400 2400 2400 2400 2460 1777 1777 2625 2491 2450
VRAM Speed (Gbps) 16 16 16 17.5 17 14 15 18 14 16
VRAM (GB) 8 8 8 16 8 8 12 8 8 10
VRAM Bus Width 256 256 256 256 128 128 192 128 128 160
L2 / Infinity Cache 16 16 16 16 24 2 3 32 32 80
ROPs 128 128 128 128 48 48 48 64 64 64
TMUs 192 224 256 256 96 80 112 128 112 144
TFLOPS FP32 (Boost) 14.7 17.2 19.7 19.7 15.1 9.1 12.7 21.5 8.9 11.3
TFLOPS FP16 (FP8) 118 138 157 157 121 (242) 36 (73) 51 (102) 43 17.8 22.6
Bandwidth (GBps) 512 512 512 560 272 224 360 288 224 320
TDP (watts) 185 225 225 225 115 130 170 165 132 175
Launch Date Oct 2023 Sep 2022 Sep 2022 Sep 2022 Jul 2023 Jan 2022 Feb 2021 May 2023 Oct 2021 Mar 2021
Launch Price $179 $289 $329 $349 $299 $249 $329 $269 $329 $479
Online Price $180 $190 $240 $280 $290 $216 $250 $240 $200 $281
Jarred Walton
Senior Editor

Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge '3D decelerators' to today's GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.

  • AgentBirdnest
    Awesome review, as always!
    Dang, was really hoping this would be more like $150-160. I bet the price will drop before long, though; I can't imagine many people choosing this over the A750 that is so closely priced. Still, it just feels good to see a card that can actually play modern AAA games for under $200.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    AgentBirdnest said:
    Awesome review, as always!
    Dang, was really hoping this would be more like $150-160. I bet the price will drop before long, though; I can't imagine many people choosing this over the A750 that is so closely priced. Still, it just feels good to see a card that can actually play modern AAA games for under $200.
    Yeah, the $180 MSRP just feels like wishful thinking right now rather than reality. I don't know what supply of Arc GPUs looks like from the manufacturing side, and I feel like Intel may already be losing money per chip. But losing a few dollars rather than losing $50 or whatever is probably a win. This would feel a ton better at $150 or even $160, and maybe add half a star to the review.
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    Intel does have some cash to burn and if they are selling these cards at a loss, it'd at least put weight that they're serious about staying in the discrete GPU business.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    hotaru.hino said:
    Intel does have some cash to burn and if they are selling these cards at a loss, it'd at least put weight that they're serious about staying in the discrete GPU business.
    That's the assumption I'm going off: Intel is willing to take a short-term / medium-term loss on GPUs in order to bootstrap its data center and overall ambitions. The consumer graphics market is just a side benefit that helps to defray the cost of driver development and all the other stuff that needs to happen.

    But when you see the number of people who have left Intel Graphics in the past year, and the way Gelsinger keeps divesting of non-profitable businesses, I can't help but wonder how much longer he'll be willing to let the Arc experiment continue. I hope we can at least get to Celestial and Druid before any final decision is made, but that will probably depend on how Battlemage does.

    Intel's GPU has a lot of room to improve, not just on drivers but on power and performance. Basically, look at Ada Lovelace and that's the bare minimum we need from Battlemage if it's really going to be competitive. We already have RDNA 3 as the less efficient, not quite as fast, etc. alternative to Intel, and AMD still has better drivers. Matching AMD isn't the end goal; Intel needs to take on Nvidia, at least up to the 4070 Ti level.
    Reply
  • mwm2010
    If the price of this goes down, then I would be very impressed. But because of the $180 price, it isn't quite at its full potential. You're probably better off with a 6600.
    Reply
  • btmedic04
    Arc just feels like one of the industries greatest "what ifs' to me. Had these launched during the great gpu shortage of 2021, Intel would have sold as many as they could produce. Hopefully Intel sticks with it, as consumers desperately need a third vendor in the market.
    Reply
  • cyrusfox
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    I can't help but wonder how much longer he'll be willing to let the Arc experiment continue. I hope we can at least get to Celestial and Druid before any final decision is made, but that will probably depend on how Battlemage does.
    What other choice do they have? If they canned their dGPU efforts, they still need staff to support for iGPU, or are they going to give up on that and license GPU tech? Also what would they do with their datacenter GPU(Ponte Vechio subsequent product).

    Only clear path forward is to continue and I hope they do bet on themselves and take these licks (financial loss + negative driver feedback) and keep pushing forward. But you are right Pat has killed a lot of items and spun off some great businesses from Intel. I hope battlemage fixes a lot of the big issues and also hope we see 3rd and 4th gen Arc play out.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Thanks @JarredWaltonGPU for another comprehensive GPU review!

    I was rather surprised not to see you reference its relatively strong Raytracing, AI, and GPU Compute performance, in either the intro or the conclusion. For me, those are definitely highlights of Alchemist, just as much as AV1 support.

    Looking at that gigantic table, on the first page, I can't help but wonder if you can ask the appropriate party for a "zoom" feature to be added for tables, similar to the way we can expand embedded images. It helps if I make my window too narrow for the sidebar - then, at least the table will grow to the full width of the window, but it's still not wide enough to avoid having the horizontal scroll bar.

    Whatever you do, don't skimp on the detail! I love it!
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    bit_user said:
    Thanks @JarredWaltonGPU for another comprehensive GPU review!

    I was rather surprised not to see you reference its relatively strong Raytracing, AI, and GPU Compute performance, in either the intro or the conclusion. For me, those are definitely highlights of Alchemist, just as much as AV1 support.

    Looking at that gigantic table, on the first page, I can't help but wonder if you can ask the appropriate party for a "zoom" feature to be added for tables, similar to the way we can expand embedded images. It helps if I make my window too narrow for the sidebar - then, at least the table will grow to the full width of the window, but it's still not wide enough to avoid having the horizontal scroll bar.

    Whatever you do, don't skimp on the detail! I love it!
    The evil CMS overlords won't let us have nice tables. That's basically the way things shake out. It hurts my heart every time I try to put in a bunch of GPUs, because I know I want to see all the specs, and I figure others do as well. Sigh.

    As for RT and AI, it's decent for sure, though I guess I just got sidetracked looking at the A750. I can't help but wonder how things could have gone differently for Intel Arc, but then the drivers still have lingering concerns. (I didn't get into it as much here, but in testing a few extra games, I noticed some were definitely underperforming on Arc.)
    Reply