Intel Arc B580 Limited Edition review: it’s a kind of magic

I can scarcely believe that I’m writing this review for Arc B580. Following the tumultuous launch of its A Series graphics cards and the painful realities of its financials, I’d all but given up hope Intel’s B Series would see the light of day. This launch makes for a pleasant surprise in many respects, the biggest of all being just how well Battlemage sticks the landing.

Arc B580 prices start from £249 ($249), and Intel’s intentions to undercut GeForce RTX 4060 and Radeon RX 7600 with a more affordable, high-value offering couldn’t be more clear. I’ve spent the past week testing the card against its closest rivals, starting my time with it from a position of cautious optimism. Even now some reservations remain but it’s clear that I’m growing to respect this graphics card. Either that or this Battlemage’s attempts to cast a charm are succeeding.

Specifications

Arc B580’s BMG-G21 die is the first example of Intel’s Xe2 architecture at work in a dedicated graphics card, following its integrated debut on the company’s Lunar Lake processors. It’s a more efficient and performant design than its A Series predecessor, broadly accomplishing more with less in terms of power and specifications.

	Arc B580	Arc A580
Released	Dec 2024	Oct 2023
Codename	Battlemage	Alchemist
Process	TSMC N5	TSMC N6
GPU	BMG-G21	ACM-G10
Transistors	19.6 billion	21.7 billion
Die size	272mm²	406mm²
Xe cores	20 (2nd gen.)	24 (1st gen.)
Render slices	5	6
Ray tracing units	20 (2nd gen.)	24 (1st gen.)
XMX AI engines	160	384
Base clock	1,700MHz	1,700MHz
Graphics clock	2,670MHz	2,000MHz
Memory	12GB (GDDR6)	8GB (GDDR6)
Mem. interface	192-bit	256-bit
Mem. bandwidth	456GB/s	512GB/s
Peak TOPs	233	197
TBP	190W	185W
Launch MSRP	£249 / $249	£180 / $180

Manufactured using TSMC’s N5 node, BMG-G21 measures 272mm² and packs 19.6 billion transistors. This makes it the largest and most transistor-rich die relative to its rivals. However, despite a decent generational improvement in transistor density, it falls well-behind the competition in terms of transistor density, at 72.1m~ per mm². This in-part leaves Arc B580 the most power-hungry of current generation cards with a 190W TBP. Competing GeForce RTX 4060, for example, carries a similar 18.9bn transistors yet is over 40% smaller at 158.7mm².

With these small pain points out of the way, it’s otherwise difficult to find fault in BMG-G21. In its full-fat configuration, as deployed in Arc B580, its most welcome trait is 12GB of GDDR6 VRAM riding in on a 192-bit memory bus at 19Gbps. Altogether this specs combo makes for a whopping 456GB/s of bandwidth, 56GB/s short of its predecessor but nonetheless miles ahead of GeForce RTX 4060 (272GB/s) and Radeon RX 7600 (288GB/s). This advantage gives the card more space to perform at higher resolutions in addition to ray traced effects, both of which are growing in prevalence and often proving too much for its 8GB contemporaries to bear.

Important as bandwidth is, the GPU behind it remains the priority. BMG-G21 boasts five render slices under the hood which in total hold up to 20 Xe cores and RTUs (Ray Tracing Units), respectively. Though these are all fewer in number than the equivalent prior generation die, ACM-G10, the capabilities of each are that much higher that the quantitative shortfall essentially becomes moot.

Thanks to a complete overhaul of their design, Xe2 cores are better able to rely on hardware acceleration and sport SIMD16 engines, up from SIMD8, allowing them to perform twice as many operations per thread. This also greatly benefits application compatibility, a problem that Intel rightly addresses following the well-documented and prevalent problems with its A Series cards.

BMG-G21’s RTUs are also a cut above what came before, similarly rearchitected from scratch like current generation Xe cores. Each unit now holds 1.5x more traversal pipelines (three) and box intersections (18). Meanwhile, triangle intersections double up to to two in total. In practice, this means the GPU can deliver ray traced effects faster and more efficiently resulting in a higher level of performance. That’s not forgetting a markedly higher 2,670MHz clock speed that compounds the benefits of these architectural gains.

Before I move on to benchmarks, a brief word on 160 XMX AI Engines nestled in BMG-G21. These components serve to better the GPU acceleration Arc B580 can offer LLMs (Large Language Models) and generative applications such as Stable Diffusion. More interestingly, they also improve results from XeSS Super Resolution upscaling and are integral to the next evolutions of Intel’s graphics software suite: frame generation and low latency.

BMG-G21 and by extension Arc B580 seem more confidently executed than their predecessors. First generation products are typically prone to problems and A Series gave Intel plenty to deal with. Thankfully, the plethora of architectural improvements and smart specification place the inaugural B Series graphics card in a prime position to disrupt a budget market in desperate need of a shakeup. Without spoiling too much, this is a genuine competitor.

Design

Like Arc A770 and A750 before it, B580 receives a ‘Limited Edition’ treatment from Intel. It’s the only B Series graphics card that the company plans to produce in-house, leaving Arc B570 solely in the hands of board partners. The design language isn’t a massive departure from prior efforts save for a few notable amendments, but that’s not a bad thing in my eyes.

The front of the card features two black fans with a metallic centre, sans the LED surrounds from Arc A770. They both sit lower than the rest of the faceplate, saving the card from what could’ve easily been a boring and blocky appearance. As it stands, though, I appreciate the subtle and reserved styling. The rubberised texture feels nice in the hand and looks great to the eye, but it’s an absolute magnet for fingerprints and oils so be sure to give it a wipe before showcasing it in your system.

Flipping over to the backplate, Arc B580 flies its flag proudly with large and bold silver lettering. The abstract pattern towards its top-left is tasteful too, although I couldn’t tell you its meaning (if it has any). I also appreciate the subtle reflectively of both elements which bounces surrounding light just enough to catch your eye without causing any glare.

A small declining slope adds some welcome dimension to the heatsink cut-out, the latter of which Intel claims helps better dissipate heat. Practical and tasteful, I’m a fan.

Round the side there’s an ‘intel ARC’ LED, which lights up bright and white with some power flowing through it. Speaking of which, this Limited Edition variant uses a single PCIe eight-pin connector. This is the case for many partner designs too, but some such as ASRock’s Steel Legend carry two headers instead.

Compact and convenient as 12V-2×6 is, there’s really no need to use the extra connector on a card with such a low TBP. I’m also sure the majority of Arc B580’s target audience, namely budget builders, are rocking PSUs that likely don’t include such cables. At the very least, I’m thankful there’s no unsightly dongle to spoil proceedings. Intel’s reference design gets it right.

Rocking three DisplayPort 2.1 inputs, Arc B580 joins its Radeon rivals in pushing display bandwidth firmly forward. While it doesn’t have the horsepower to saturate the 80Gbps of bandwidth this connector offers, enabling outputs up to 16K at 60Hz, it’s great to see the latest and greatest I/O on a budget pixel pusher.

Of course, no graphics card is complete without HDMI. Intel hasn’t forgotten this all-important connector, obliging Arc B580 with a single HDMI 2.1 header. USB-C, sadly, is yet to become a thing for discrete cards.

Performance

Intel markets Arc B580 as an ideal choice for budget gamers hoping to game at FHD (1080p) or QHD (1440p). I largely agree with this assessment after assessing the capabilities of the GPU and constraints of its relatively healthy memory bandwidth and buffer. As such, I have benchmarked it and competing graphics cards at both resolutions, skipping UHD (4K) altogether. I’ve also included an older card – the ever-popular GeForce GTX 1060 – as a frame of reference for those contemplating an upgrade from ageing gear.

To make sure this is a fair fight between Arc B580 and its competitors, I have freshly captured new frame data for each graphics card using the latest drivers. Naturally, the Club386 AM5 test systems are more than up to the task of showing them all at their best.

3DMark

Arc B580 enjoys an early win in 3DMark Steel Nomad, clearing its contemporaries and price predecessor with a score of 3,084. Although its lead is somewhat dramatic in this synthetic battleground, it’s not always top dog in games as will become clear.

Meanwhile, on the ray tracing front in 3DMark Speed Way, GeForce RTX 4060 pips ahead of Intel’s B Series champion. Once again, though, real-world implication isn’t a given as we enter the arena of actual games and applications.

Gaming

In a surprise turn of events, Arc B580 finds itself lagging both Radeon RX 7600 and GeForce RTX 4060 in Assassin’s Creed Mirage at FHD resolution. It’s only 5-8fps behind on average, but I expected to see it on top given Intel sponsored this title’s development.

Moving up to QHD, Arc B580 climbs to the top of the leaderboard with a small lead of 3fps. Take note of the more sizeable 25fps gap between Arc A750, a welcome 46% leap in performance. It won’t be the last chasm separating the two graphics cards.

GeForce GTX 1060 meets AC Mirage’s minimum system requirements and delivers a semi-playable experience at FHD, but it’s plain to see how much further graphics card performance has come since its launch almost a decade ago. Surprisingly, around 2.6%~ of Steam’s user base is still rocking this beloved pixel pusher. Should any of them seek a current generation upgrade, Arc B580 delivers a 2.3x uplift at FHD, moving up to 2.5x at QHD.

Call of Duty Blacks Ops 6 represents an unfortunate stumbling point for Arc B580. While all other graphics cards on the bar chart benefit from VRS (Variable Rate Shading), the game strangely doesn’t recognise that the Battlemage GPU also supports the feature.

It’s unclear when either Activision or Intel will fix this issue, but examples like this show that B Series isn’t entirely free of kinks. I’ll be sure to update these results once a patch emerges.

At last, the first ray tracing benchmark via Cyberpunk 2077. Arc B580 emerges victorious at both resolutions, as the poor GeForce GTX 1060 sadly bows out of the race owing to its lack of RTX chops. Even at FHD, rendering a ray traced Night City is a difficult task for all four remaining graphics cards, with GeForce RTX 4060 and Arc B580 being the only ones to deliver average frame rates north of 30fps. Sadly, neither can muster the horsepower to reach such heights at QHD.

However, this is only in terms of native rendering grunt. Both DLSS and XeSS upscaling are on offer via the options menu, with frame generation features also open to both cards thanks to the inclusion of FSR 3. I’m hopeful for an official implementation of XeSS Frame Generation in the future, or one from the modding community, but we’ll have to wait and see.

An average framerate of 128fps sees Arc B580 snatch the Final Fantasy XIV: Dawntrail crown from GeForce RTX 4060, but its performance is less consistent than either of its competitors at FHD. With a 49fps minimum, it’s not as smooth sailing as the competition.

QHD serves as an equaliser of sorts, bringing every graphics card’s minimum results within several frames of one another. However, Arc B580 emerges as king of the hill once again. Radeon RX 7600 fares the worst following the bump in resolution, enduring a sharp decline of 50fps on average.

Leaving GeForce GTX 1060 in the pits due to ray tracing, there are four contenders still in the running for the Forza Motorsport trophy. It’s something of a photo finish at FHD, with just two frames separating the average frame rate of GeForce RTX 4060 and Arc B580 but the latter graphics card claims the most-prized podium position. It boasts better consistency too, boasting 1% lows of 48fps to the other’s 30fps.

The race is far less close at QHD, as Arc B580 clears its closest competition by 10fps. Once again, its 1% lows are better too, undoubtedly in part thanks to its higher bandwidth given the intensity of the game’s ray tracing effects. 12GB of memory makes a lot of sense at the higher resolution.

Switching seats for stirrups and ray tracing for rasterization, Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord proves a bloody battleground for all five graphics cards. GeForce GTX 1060 finds itself dead last, its competitors more than doubling its performance at both resolutions. More importantly, though, Arc B580 concedes to Radeon RX 7600 at FHD in average frame rates but claims victory in terms of 1% lows.

As this war grows more intense at QHD, Arc B580 finds the fervour to claw its way to the winner’s circle. Radeon RX 7600 isn’t far behind, as GeForce RTX 4060 and Arc A750 duke it out with identical average frame rates of 101fps. However, the A Series underdog claims the bronze on account of higher 1% lows to the tune of 2fps.

In our final gaming head-to-head, Arc B580 clutches another set of wins in Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Extraction. Approaching 200fps at FHD, it more than proves itself worthy as a capable, budget esports graphics card. This is presuming you have a suitably powerful processor to keep up with it but even an affordable modern hexacore processor like Ryzen 5 7600X or 9600X would do.

Intel performs similarly well at QHD, delivering 130fps and the best 1% lows to boot. It’s well clear of its peers and all the more so of Arc A750, with a 31% differential.

Vitals

As its specifications hinted, Arc B580 isn’t the most efficient of the big three. Unsurprisingly, our system pulls more watts while under load using this graphics card than it does with GeForce RTX 4060. Soaking up all the watts, both Radeon RX 7600 and Arc A750 emerge as the relatively more gluttonous competitors.

Credit where it’s due, Intel has clearly made decent efficiency gains as Arc B580 pulls 17% (54) fewer watts than Arc A750. However, the company hasn’t addressed issues concerning high idle power consumption that have made themselves known since its A Series. This should be a problem that the company can solve via driver or firmware updates, but it’s disappointing to not see it nipped in the bud prior to launch.

That rear cut-out is seemingly no joke, undoubtedly playing a part in helping Arc B580 run at an impressively cool 55°C. Given this result and its relatively petite dimensions, 27.4 x 12.7 x 3.8cm (L x H x D), I’m keen to see some SSF PCs rocking Intel’s latest.

Arc B580’s relatively cool operating temperatures thankfully aren’t at the cost of high noise levels. This Limited Edition cooler design is nice and quiet under load, with the test system’s case fans proving more audible to my ear.

XeSS 2

Alongside B580, Intel is introducing frame generation and latency reduction technologies to its software suite to complement its existing upscaling feature. Following the branding format of its competitors, the company is dubbing the collection ‘XeSS 2’.

XeSS-SR (Xe Super Sampling – Super Resolution) remains unchanged from prior versions. To recap, it operates most similarly to Nvidia DLSS by using an AI network to upscale frames from a lower resolution source. While the bones of the feature are the same as they’ve ever been, Intel is broadening compatibility. Now, in addition to DirectX 12, the SDK supports both DirectX 11 and Vulkan APIs.

The most compelling of the XeSS 2 suite is undoubtedly XeSS-FG (Xe Super Sampling – Frame Generation). Given both AMD and Nvidia now have their own frame generation solutions, Intel couldn’t possibly afford to show up empty handed in this regard.

This tech uses neural networks in tandem with a game’s motion vectors and depth to produce interpolated frames, boosting performance. Intel claims that combining XeSS-FG and SR can result in graphics cards producing just one-in-eight pixels via standard rasterization, handing the rest to AI.

Latency is inherent to any frame generation technology, so it should come as no surprise that Intel has a solution to mitigate this problem. Enter XeLL (Xe Low Latency).

The prospect of comparing this to Nvidia Reflex and AMD Anti-Lag is an intriguing one, but we’ll need to wait for a game to emerge that supports all three. While it’s part and parcel of XeSS-FG, Intel tells me that developers will be able to offer a toggleable option for XeLL on its lonesome.

Support for XeSS 2 will unavoidably take time, but I was able to take it for a spin with an beta build of F1 24. Keen to see how it could relieve the pressures of the game’s Ultra High preset at QHD on Arc B580, I ran benchmarks using XeSS-SR and XeSS-FG each flying solo and in combination.

	Average fps	+/- vs. Native
Native (QHD)	51fps	N/A
XeSS (Performance)	85fps	+66%
XeSS-FG	90fps	+76%
XeSS+FG	145fps	+284%

Running XeSS-SR in ‘Performance’ mode, I was happy to see a sizeable 66% uplift in average frame rates. What I did not expect was a larger 76% bump from just XeSS-FG alone. More surprising still was the enormous 284% jump from combining the two features. The results were nothing short of transformative.

Turning my eye to the quality of frames rather than their quantity, I found XeSS 2’s temporal stability to be of a generally high standard. You will find shimmering and ghosting artefacts if you look hard enough, but none are so obvious or distracting to pull you out of any suspension of disbelief. In F1 24 specifically, thin objects like chain link fences and overhanging wires were the most obvious examples but your eyes really should be on the road and your opponents’ cars instead of the surrounding scenery in a game like this.

I would like to see XeSS 2 at work in other games before making any definitive statements on it. With no other examples to draw from, it’s difficult to assess whether any shortcomings are inherent to its technologies or F1 24’s specific implementation. The suite is coming to more titles soon, including Marvel Rivals and Assassin’s Creed Shadows which should provide suitable reference material.

For now, XeSS 2 appears to be a solid effort from Intel to further boost the competitiveness of its graphics cards. Better still, it’s not exclusive to the likes of B580 and its Battlemage ilk with support extending to A Series models and even Lunar Lake APUs.

Overclocking

Pushing Arc B580 beyond its stock specifications is a straightforward task using the tools included in Intel Graphics Software. New for the B Series launch, it’s a decided improvement over the company’s previous Arc Control application with a more intuitive and responsive interface.

Under the ‘Tuning’ tab I find sliders to tune power limits and frequencies that anyone who’s tried overclocking before should recognise. For those new to the practice, Intel includes helpful tooltips for each option. The software will also prompt users via Windows notifications if their configuration is unstable, resetting to default in the event of a crash.

For my part, I was able to achieve a 200MHz GPU overclock while also pushing memory speed up to 20Gbps, from 19Gbps. Not a particularly impressive result, but few overclocks rarely are in this modern era of graphics.

Results in Steel Nomad and Speed Way rose by several hundred points each (scores of 3,283 and 2,544, respectively). Gaming performance, though, is far less exciting. Cyberpunk 2077 average frame rates rose by an enormous 2fps and Rainbow Six Extraction doesn’t fare much better with an additional 5fps.

Points to Intel for making the overclocking process a simple affair, but I hope Arc B580 isn’t the most powerful showcase we’ll have for this toolset. I eagerly await a B Series 700 graphics card, but I’ll settle for something from the company’s coming Celestial offerings.

Conclusion

Barring one or two wobbles, Arc B580 successfully disrupts the established graphics card hierarchy in the sub-£300 space. It more often than not beats both Radeon RX 7600 and GeForce RTX 4060, suffering no losses bar one as resolutions rise to QHD. There’s no denying its value, from a pure performance for pennies standpoint. Whether you’re talking launch MSRPs or current pricing, it’s undefeated.

XeSS 2 adoption seems likely to grow steadily in the coming months, giving Arc B580 all the features it will need to keep pace with the competition. It remains an unproven suite for the moment, but if Intel can give frame generation and upscaling technologies the same polish as its driver suite then the sky’s the limit.

Much as these victories are worth celebrating, I can’t shake the feeling that time may not be on Arc B580’s side. It’s an open secret that both AMD and Nvidia plan to launch a new batch of graphics cards in the coming months, with some suggesting replacements for GeForce RTX 4060 and Radeon RX 7600 will materialise sooner rather than later. These new rivals will be the true test of Intel’s mettle, potentially moving the performance goal post beyond its reach as well as pushing prices down of current generation stock to challenge its value.

Thematically appropriate as it is to gaze into the crystal ball of what the future will hold, it’s easy to ignore the magic of the here and now. Presently, Arc B580 is a solid budget graphics card if you simply can’t wait for an upgrade. For the patient among us, though, it might be worth seeing what January 2025 holds before making any purchases.

Verdict: A long overdue disruption, Arc B580 represents a welcome step in the right direction for entry-level graphics cards.