Intel HD 4000 integrated chip vs. super low end Nvidia Geforce 610m
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
I am buying an Asus K55VD laptop that comes equipped with an i7-3610QM processor and HD 4000 integrated graphics chip. It also comes standard with the underpowered nvidia geforce 610m. Based upon reviews and benchmarks I've read of the 610m and the hd 4000, it seems like they offer nearly identical performance.
My question is: Would turning on the 610m improve graphics performance (fps) in games appreciably or should I just run the integrated chip all the time?
ps: I was looking for a cheap mid-range product primarily for mobile office use, but also for some gaming. Therefore, suggestions to get a more gaming optimized system won't be helpful.
My question is: Would turning on the 610m improve graphics performance (fps) in games appreciably or should I just run the integrated chip all the time?
ps: I was looking for a cheap mid-range product primarily for mobile office use, but also for some gaming. Therefore, suggestions to get a more gaming optimized system won't be helpful.
Best solution
Based on the following it seems the GT 610M is meant to compete more against the older HD 3000 graphic core than the newer HD 4000 graphic core. It's not a full blown review comparing the GT 610m and the HD 4000 in many games, but the supporting benchmarks seems to indicate that the HD 4000 performs better when looking that the lowest graphic settings. You need to hover the mouse around "Low", "Med", etc to see exactly what resolution is being used because it's different for every game.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.691...
Anno 2070 benchmarks both and the GT 610M comes up as 28% less performance than the Intel HD 4000.
In COD: MW3 the GT 610M is 10% faster.
In BF3 the GT 610M is 24% slower.
Both are about equal in FIFA 12 with the HD 4000 being 4% faster.
In F1 2011 the GT 610M is marginally faster by 7%.
Deux Ex: HR the GT 610M is slower by 12%.
In Crysis 2 the GT 610M is slower by 24%.
Mafia 2 the GT 610M is slower by 13%.
In StarCraft 2 the Intel HD 4000 is 2% faster than the GT 630M so that means it should be faster than the GT 610M by a wide margin.
Considering that the HD 4000 is only 6% slower than the GT 630M in Metro 2033, the HD 4000 is by default faster than the GT 610M.
WoW is a tie.
Based on the above, this is probably the 1st time where I've seen a discrete graphic card being slower than an integrated graphic core. My advice is to simply by an Ivy Bridge laptop without a GT 610M to save some money. If you are sticking with the Asus K55VD, then I recommend simply uninstalling the nVidia drivers so that the GT 610M will be disabled.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.691...
Anno 2070 benchmarks both and the GT 610M comes up as 28% less performance than the Intel HD 4000.
In COD: MW3 the GT 610M is 10% faster.
In BF3 the GT 610M is 24% slower.
Both are about equal in FIFA 12 with the HD 4000 being 4% faster.
In F1 2011 the GT 610M is marginally faster by 7%.
Deux Ex: HR the GT 610M is slower by 12%.
In Crysis 2 the GT 610M is slower by 24%.
Mafia 2 the GT 610M is slower by 13%.
In StarCraft 2 the Intel HD 4000 is 2% faster than the GT 630M so that means it should be faster than the GT 610M by a wide margin.
Considering that the HD 4000 is only 6% slower than the GT 630M in Metro 2033, the HD 4000 is by default faster than the GT 610M.
WoW is a tie.
Based on the above, this is probably the 1st time where I've seen a discrete graphic card being slower than an integrated graphic core. My advice is to simply by an Ivy Bridge laptop without a GT 610M to save some money. If you are sticking with the Asus K55VD, then I recommend simply uninstalling the nVidia drivers so that the GT 610M will be disabled.
Related resources
- GT 610M vs GT 650M - Forum
- ATI Mobility Radeon HD 7470M or NVIDIA GEFORCE 610M - 2 GB? - Forum
- Graphic Memory Intel HD 4000 Review or Performance - Forum
- Integrated Intel ® HD Graphics 4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 - Forum
- Haswell Integrated Graphics Up to 3X faster than HD 4000 ! - Forum
Another potential issue has occurred to me. As I was looking through the review and benchmarking site that you linked, I noticed that all of the 610m benchmarks were done using systems with 2nd generation intel i3 cpu , while the intel hd 4000 benchmarks were all done with 3rd generation intel i7 cpu. I think this might be skewing the results in favor of the hd 4000.
Do you think a benchmark of the 610m using a 3rd generation i7 cpu would generate better results than the hd 4000?
Do you think a benchmark of the 610m using a 3rd generation i7 cpu would generate better results than the hd 4000?
Laptop benchmarks are not clear cut as desktop benchmarks because you can't simply swap out the graphic card and keep everything else the same. Therefore, you are going to run into situations where on laptop may have a quad core CPU while another laptop may only have a dual core CPU.
Generally speaking, an Ivy Bridge CPU has about 4% more processing power on average compared to a Sandy Bridge CPU with the same clockspeed. That small difference does not really affect games that much; it might give a 2% performance boost if the game is dependent on the CPU.
That does not mean if the GT 610m is 13% slower than the Intel HD 4000 the difference will improve to only a 11% difference. It means the performance will improve by 2% of the 13%, so 2% of 13% works out to 0.26% which basically means the GT 610m with an Ivy Bridge CPU will only be 12.74% slower than the Intel HD 4000. Round that to the nearest whole number and you are back at 13%.
Generally speaking, an Ivy Bridge CPU has about 4% more processing power on average compared to a Sandy Bridge CPU with the same clockspeed. That small difference does not really affect games that much; it might give a 2% performance boost if the game is dependent on the CPU.
That does not mean if the GT 610m is 13% slower than the Intel HD 4000 the difference will improve to only a 11% difference. It means the performance will improve by 2% of the 13%, so 2% of 13% works out to 0.26% which basically means the GT 610m with an Ivy Bridge CPU will only be 12.74% slower than the Intel HD 4000. Round that to the nearest whole number and you are back at 13%.
Thank you for your feedback.
I've found a solution to this problem. The Acer V3-571G-9435 has very close to the same specifications as the Asus K55-VD for a little less money. It comes with a nvidia GT540m, which I am confident will not be a wasted component like the 610m would have been. The negatives associated with the cheaper Acer model are 250 less gb of HDD space and lack of an ethernet lan port (has wireless card and bluetooth). So, not a big deal performance-wise.
I've found a solution to this problem. The Acer V3-571G-9435 has very close to the same specifications as the Asus K55-VD for a little less money. It comes with a nvidia GT540m, which I am confident will not be a wasted component like the 610m would have been. The negatives associated with the cheaper Acer model are 250 less gb of HDD space and lack of an ethernet lan port (has wireless card and bluetooth). So, not a big deal performance-wise.
ilhazard said:
I am buying an Asus K55VD laptop that comes equipped with an i7-3610QM processor and HD 4000 integrated graphics chip. It also comes standard with the underpowered nvidia geforce 610m. Based upon reviews and benchmarks I've read of the 610m and the hd 4000, it seems like they offer nearly identical performance. My question is: Would turning on the 610m improve graphics performance (fps) in games appreciably or should I just run the integrated chip all the time?
ps: I was looking for a cheap mid-range product primarily for mobile office use, but also for some gaming. Therefore, suggestions to get a more gaming optimized system won't be helpful.
I have a A55VD (which is the same K55VD) and I'm having problems with my Nvidia card. I cannot find it anywhere. Iread that you can turn it on but I have no Idea how to do that. would you midn explaining how?
It is amazing, how ignorant are the laptop manufacturers, or simply they are misusing their consumers trust by plugging in a useless card. Mainly I saw that from Asus, but others doing that as well. There is absolutely no point (except for being able to program CUDA) to buying a laptop with a Sandy or Ivy processor and a 610M.
Related resources:
- ForumHD video editing on integrated i7 graphics?
- ForumQuestion about Intel HD 4000
- ForumHD 4000 or AMD Fusion?
- ForumNVIDIA ® GeForce ® GT 640 1GB spGDDR5 or AMD Radeon™ HD 7770 2GB GDDR5?
- ForumHigh- End personal Workstation Guidance
- ForumLaptop Comparison - Shared Intel ® HD 4000 dilemma
- Forum$ 4000 HD Video Editing Build
- ForumMy first super build( 4000 - 5000 budget)
- ForumNVIDIA ® GeForce ® GT 640 1GB vs AMD Radeon™ HD 7570 1GB GDDR5
- ForumIntel 's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews
- Forum24" and resolution question
- ForumBest non-reference Geforce GTX 670 GPU?
- ForumDoes Intel GMA 950 Dynamic Video Memory Technology 3 0 work with The Sims 3
- ForumATI Radeon HD5670 or Nvidia GTX460
- Forum[Solved] Whats better for gaming the AMD 5450 or nVIDIA 9800gt
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!
