Arc B580 vs Arc 8-Core iGPU
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc 8-Core iGPU with Arc B580, including specs and performance data.
Arc B580 outperforms Arc 8-Core iGPU by a whopping 119% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 302 | 100 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 93.08 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 14.69 |
| Architecture | Xe LPG (2023) | Xe2 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Meteor Lake iGPU | BMG-G21 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (1 year ago) | 16 January 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $249 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 2670 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2300 MHz | 2670 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 19,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 190 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 427.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 13.67 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 80 |
| TMUs | no data | 160 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 160 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 272 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | no data | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 2375 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 456.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |
| HDMI | - | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_2 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.4 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 36
−247%
| 125
+247%
|
| 1440p | 19
−263%
| 69
+263%
|
| 4K | 15
−187%
| 43
+187%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 1.99 |
| 1440p | no data | 3.61 |
| 4K | no data | 5.79 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 26
−450%
|
143
+450%
|
| Elden Ring | 30
−117%
|
65−70
+117%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
−79.7%
|
100−110
+79.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 26
−350%
|
117
+350%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 71
−111%
|
150−160
+111%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40
−143%
|
95−100
+143%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 40−45
−83.7%
|
75−80
+83.7%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−117%
|
160−170
+117%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
−79.7%
|
100−110
+79.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 23
−352%
|
104
+352%
|
| Dota 2 | 25
−460%
|
140
+460%
|
| Elden Ring | 55−60
−142%
|
140−150
+142%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 34
−103%
|
69
+103%
|
| Fortnite | 100−105
−76%
|
170−180
+76%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 59
−103%
|
120−130
+103%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 25
−100%
|
50−55
+100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 29
−24.1%
|
36
+24.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
−59.8%
|
200−210
+59.8%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 40−45
−83.7%
|
75−80
+83.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
−150%
|
140−150
+150%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−117%
|
160−170
+117%
|
| World of Tanks | 220−230
−25.7%
|
270−280
+25.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
−79.7%
|
100−110
+79.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21
−352%
|
95
+352%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
−54.7%
|
95−100
+54.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 46
−117%
|
100−105
+117%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
−59.8%
|
200−210
+59.8%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
−117%
|
160−170
+117%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 11
−527%
|
69
+527%
|
| Elden Ring | 30−33
−180%
|
80−85
+180%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 11
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
−110%
|
350−400
+110%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
−141%
|
40−45
+141%
|
| World of Tanks | 120−130
−103%
|
250−260
+103%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−94.7%
|
70−75
+94.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 11
−455%
|
61
+455%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−169%
|
130−140
+169%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30
−117%
|
65−70
+117%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
−107%
|
85−90
+107%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
−112%
|
55−60
+112%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
−177%
|
130−140
+177%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−180%
|
40−45
+180%
|
| Dota 2 | 9
−767%
|
78
+767%
|
| Elden Ring | 12−14
−208%
|
40−45
+208%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9
−100%
|
18−20
+100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
−254%
|
46
+254%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
−140%
|
130−140
+140%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9
−100%
|
18−20
+100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
−167%
|
45−50
+167%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−180%
|
40−45
+180%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−154%
|
60−65
+154%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−164%
|
55−60
+164%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 15
−100%
|
30−33
+100%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−214%
|
65−70
+214%
|
This is how Arc 8-Core iGPU and Arc B580 compete in popular games:
- Arc B580 is 247% faster in 1080p
- Arc B580 is 263% faster in 1440p
- Arc B580 is 187% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc B580 is 767% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, Arc B580 surpassed Arc 8-Core iGPU in all 43 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.53 | 40.60 |
| Recency | 14 December 2023 | 16 January 2025 |
Arc B580 has a 119.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.
The Arc B580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc 8-Core iGPU in performance tests.
Be aware that Arc 8-Core iGPU is a notebook card while Arc B580 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
