• simple@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Were they though? After they fixed the drivers and used proper transition layers for directX they’re really decent entry-level cards.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I disagree.

        The drivers are much improved, yes, but in the meantime we’ve had the Arc cards performing like shit and being unstable for a year, and that’s after they already released far later than the competition. Even now the drivers are still much worse than AMD or Nvidia and run into issues.

        Their power usage is a joke, their die size is more similar to a card 2 tiers above the performance of what the cards achieve.

        The price wasn’t good either. Yeah they beat Nvidia by a bit, but they cost more than AMD for a far inferior product.

        Arc was a failure. That’s why Intel shut down their AXG division. You don’t do that to a division that’s performing well.

        I understand people want a third player in the GPU space, I do too, but the truth is, Arc was bad. I don’t think we should call them good just because they have a blue badge instead of a green or red one.

        • Night Monkey@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Based comment. I want them to succeed. I guess. But people seem to be making disingenuous claims about it.

    • Night Monkey@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Responding to the pro arc people: “yeah the last one was kinda shit. And it’s Intel. But, it’s cool because it’s not AMD or Nvidia”

      I’m so confused