• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel Arc Battlemage

Grim5

Grim5

Grim5

Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
18,604
We have the first GPU benchmark leak for battlemage. Unfortunately it's not a great GPu benchmark, they used SiSoft Sandra.

Nevertheless in this first benchmark Battlemage scores 80% higher than Alchemist. Both the Alchemist and Battlemage GPU had the same number of cores so it appears the 80% improvement could be related to clockspeed, IPC and architecture improvements

wccftech.com

Intel Lunar Lake With Battlemage iGPU Almost 2x Faster Than Arrow Lake With Alchemist+ iGPU In Early Benchmark Leak

Early benchmarks of Intel's upcoming Lunar Lake & Arrow Lake iGPUs featuring the Alchemist+ "Xe-LPG+" and Battlemage "Xe2" GPUs have leaked.
wccftech.com wccftech.com



If the 80% improvement like for like holds true for high end models then the replacement GPU for the A770 would have the same performance as a RTX3090ti and if the replacement has more cores than the A770 then it could be even faster.


Now while that's great news it may also be disappointing because it looks like Battlemage is going to compete with the 4070ti to 4080 and not necessarily with something like a 5090 or 5080. But might I remind you to look at how cheap Intel GPUs are and I don't think anyone will be unhappy if Intel offers 4070ti/4080 performance for $400
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
But might I remind you to look at how cheap Intel GPUs are
Click to expand...
But it wasn't that way at launch was it? I remember people complaining quite vocally about them just matching AMD pricing whilst being worse performers.

I'd expect 4070S kind of performance, and then if it's more it'll be a nice surprise.
 
The GPU market has been dead to me for a while, a combination of greed and consumer stupidity have killed what was once an exciting past time. With that said after seeing how Intel stuck with Alchmeist and iorned out all the driver issues I'm am looking forward to Battlemage and hope it can inject some excitement back into this market.
 
throwaway4372 said:
Do we have an eta?
Click to expand...
Final silicon for BM was passed to the Intel driver team back in September, they won't want a repeat of the Alchemist release for BM and Tom Peterson when asked about the release gave a vague answer of 'sometime in 2024' so I guess it's a case of it will be released when it's ready. Leakers like RedGamingTech have said BM is due to be launched by Q2 (based on a leaked Intel roadmap), he's normally pretty good with his information but plans can change at any point and proabably will given how far out Q2 is.
 
Last edited:
50% IPC gain, 100% RT improvement, wider pipelines, more cache, hardware acceleration transistors for unreal engine 5.3+ draw calls and more efficient

Apart from 100% faster RT coming from new RT cores, most of the performance comes from fixing alchemist. Tom Peterson says Alchemist was extremely inefficient and they've tried to fix it for Battlemage

 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
We have the first GPU benchmark leak for battlemage. Unfortunately it's not a great GPu benchmark, they used SiSoft Sandra.

Nevertheless in this first benchmark Battlemage scores 80% higher than Alchemist. Both the Alchemist and Battlemage GPU had the same number of cores so it appears the 80% improvement could be related to clockspeed, IPC and architecture improvements

wccftech.com

Intel Lunar Lake With Battlemage iGPU Almost 2x Faster Than Arrow Lake With Alchemist+ iGPU In Early Benchmark Leak

Early benchmarks of Intel's upcoming Lunar Lake & Arrow Lake iGPUs featuring the Alchemist+ "Xe-LPG+" and Battlemage "Xe2" GPUs have leaked.
wccftech.com wccftech.com



If the 80% improvement like for like holds true for high end models then the replacement GPU for the A770 would have the same performance as a RTX3090ti and if the replacement has more cores than the A770 then it could be even faster.


Now while that's great news it may also be disappointing because it looks like Battlemage is going to compete with the 4070ti to 4080 and not necessarily with something like a 5090 or 5080. But might I remind you to look at how cheap Intel GPUs are and I don't think anyone will be unhappy if Intel offers 4070ti/4080 performance for $400
Click to expand...

Intel love using SiSoft Sandra, for the same reason no one else uses it.

Intel own it, its Intel software.
 
Last edited:
Joxeon said:
If Intel can even offer 4070 super for £400 then AMD and Nvidia are screwed
Click to expand...

What makes you think A, they will be as fast or faster than a 4070 Super, is it because they are touting numbers like 100% per core performance improvement?

And B, for arguments sake lets say they are, what makes you think they will be 30% cheaper? Given that since day one Intel have been more expensive than Nvidia never mind AMD, they still are even now.
 
Steve Burke asked Tom Peterson to justify Intel in the GPU space, its a good question, Tom said "Intel offer the best quality" I like Tom, i like the cut of his jib, tells it how it is in no uncertain terms or how he sees it, take it or leave it, Ex-Nvidia guy.

Tom's Answer was very telling of Intel's attitude in this space, don't you think? They think people in this space are missing a premium product, what do we think about that?
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
What makes you think A, they will be as fast or faster than a 4070 Super, is it because they are touting numbers like 100% per core performance improvement?

And B, for arguments sake lets say they are, what makes you think they will be 30% cheaper? Given that since day one Intel have been more expensive than Nvidia never mind AMD, they still are even now.
Click to expand...
For the Per mm2 of silicon your getting the intel cards are far cheaper than both AMD and Nvidia, if they fix performance then they should be in a good spot.
 
Joxeon said:
For the Per mm2 of silicon your getting the intel cards are far cheaper than both AMD and Nvidia, if they fix performance then they should be in a good spot.
Click to expand...

Its 406mm on TSMC 6nm, to put that in to perspective the RX 6750 XT, which is on the same TSMC 6nm is 335mm.

Or, the compute die on the RX 7800 XT is 200mm on TSMC 5nm with a further 150mm of MCD's on 6nm, so 350mm mixed lithography total. On 5nm / 6nm that's small for the performance its pushing out, its the same performance as an RX 6900 XT of the previous 6nm 520mm die generation.
The 7900 XTX is 300mm compute 5nm and 225mm 6nm MCM for a total of 525mm mixed lithography for 80% the performance of the RTX 4090 at 609mm on TSMC 4N (4nm)

That's what they are up against with Battlemage, in fact not even that because both AMD and Nvidia are likely to put out the latest gen GPU before this year is out and time is ticking away...

Battlemage should really have been out already and we should be talking about Celestial.

Reality checking :)
 
Last edited:
Battlemage needs to be 2X as fast as ARC to compete with the RX 7800 XT at £450, which is already a GPU nearing replacement, its old now...

GPU stuffs hard yo and AMD aren't incompetent.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom