Why is the availability of Intel Arc GPUs so terrible in India?
- Thread starter crytt
- Start date
Maverick0193
Contributor
Maybe because intel is not an established player in the gpu market and kept the production low at the begining to see how it performs in states and eu.
It's not just an India thing. Intel Arc GPU stocks are an issue in the US and EU as well. The cheapest model is currently selling at $370 and these have an MSRP of $250. Maybe Intel kept production low so they don't face losses like they are going through currently in the processors market.
We don't get ANY GPU at MSRP
Situation around GPUs is somehow worse than China in India
Arigaytor
Explorer
I meant that even the 25k (price point with taxes) is still probably not going to come to India anytime soon
adeshkustwar
Apprentice
The reality is - nobody wants to import it and sell it. Intel has listed partners that may import intel arc gpus but none of them are doing so in india.
The_King
Explorer
Seems some B570s and B580s are finally available here! Took them long enough wanted to get a B580 a few months back, but probably not going to buy one now since the 9060 XT is probably a better buy for slightly more.
dank.it
Contributor
It may case but that would be mostly Nvidia, don't think it leading to Intel gpu shortage mostly due to CUDA
bssunilreddy
Luminary
Is getting an Intel Arc B580 @ 27k better or RX9060XT @ 37k better? As my budget is limited to around 30k but my monitor is 1440p one. Should I increase my budget and buy RX9060XT then?
The_King
Explorer
I would increase the budget and go with the 9060 XT 8GB instead because it is around 20% faster at 1440p VS the B580 12GB. The extra VRAM on the B580 does not help it in most cases.
The 9060 XT 8GB version can be found around 31-32K. If you really want a 16GB card then get the 9060 XT 16GB but its only offers around 5% more performance @ 1440p VS the 9060 XT 8GB version
and compared to the B580 12GB version the 9060 XT 16GB is 24% faster @1440p overall.
Source
PowerColor Radeon RX 9060 XT Reaper 8 GB Review
We're taking a look at the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB, which comes with only half the memory size of the 16 GB models, but is at least $50 cheaper. Data from the review suggests that NVIDIA's memory management is much less efficient than the one used on RDNA 4, giving AMD the upper hand.
Last edited:
Tracer_Bullet
Herald
Bad idea. This will cut down life of the card. Dont buy 8gb cards at this price range.
Performance does not capture degraded textures and the like. And when you run out of vram, perf drops badly for those games.
Textures make a lot of difference to image quality.
16gb vram seems good enough for future for 1440p and you will be able to run games at max textures even if other things will needed to be reduced.
Just scan the reviews yourself.
The_King
Explorer
Take the 7600 XT 16GB version has an example its a 16GB card but performance wise its 24% slower @ 1440p compared to the 9060 XT 8GB version. VRAM has nothing to do with performance in this case.
In fact the 4060 Ti 16GB which cost +47K in local markets gets beat by the 9060 XT 8GB version even at 4K so great value in the current Indian market and price/performance. Better argument to get the 9060 XT 16GB
since its a bargain then at 37K
Personally I would buy a 16GB card myself. But You have to see what is available in the current markets and what is your budget and with the current options the 9060 XT 8GB is still one of the best for 1080p/1440p gaming
with a +/-30K Budget.
If 30K is my budget like what the OP said and you can recommend a better card then please do so. I made the recommendation based in this budget and buying a new card not a used one.
Thanks
Last edited:
The 9060XT 8GB is NOT the best 1440p card for 30K, especially vs the 16 GB variant. 8 GB barely scrapes even 1080p in demanding games.
The 9060XT 8 GB vs the 16GB is anywhere between 7-280% slower in averages, and 4-280% in 1% lows (depending on the game). Most of the time, you will have stutters bad enough to make you want to quit the game. That's just how it is.
So yes, VRAM has more to do with performance, than most assume.
The B580 may get lower overall performance at 1440p, but it will be a MUCH smoother and more consistent experience.
This is a moot point. 4K, with these cards, even just for comparison's sake? Not really relevant. This is relative performance, not actual figures. At 4k with a 9060XT 8GB, you may get 5 fps (due to lack of VRAM). With the 4060Ti, you will get 5.5 fps (due to lack of power). That's your relative difference of 10%.
Last edited:
Tracer_Bullet
Herald
I have twice made this mistake, first with 1050 2gb and then with 3080 10gb ( which is pretty good otherwise). I also looked at 4k benchmarks then, and everything ran fine at 4k back then except far cry 6 with absurd textures that made little diff.
So thought it was enough. Nope.
RAM is important when you need it. Averages will hide that. You have plenty of examples of games running poorly with 8 gb vram even at 1080p now - bad framerates/missing textures/spiky framerates. Future will be worse.
If op wants to keep using his gpu for long term with new games + have ability to use max textures even in future then go for higher vram.
To me, the savings is simply not worth it. Its a trap for planned obsolescence. We cannot upgrade ram as we can do on desktop.
But budget is budget. My advice will be to save and extend till 9060xt - or - go for cheap used 8gb cards such as 3060ti or better if you can manage to find one in good condition without getting scammed.
8gb cards shouldn;t be more 20k or so imo (new). Its already low for many games so should be for basement level gpus.
Last edited: