Intel expands new game-boosting iBOT software with seven more games, up to a 27% improvement — Team Blue claims 12% average jump in newly-supported titles
Some strange game choices, but iBOT is expanding.
Intel is broadening support for its Binary Optimization Tool, or iBOT, with seven new games. Across the newly-supported titles, Intel claims an average performance jump of 12%, and increases as high as 27%. To unlock support for the new games, you'll need the latest Intel Platform Performance Package. Then, you'll be able to select the games under the Advanced tab in the Intel Application Optimization GUI.
We originally saw iBOT roll out with Arrow Lake Refresh chips like the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, but the feature works on Panther Lake chips, as well as Intel's latest HX mobile chips, Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. Older Intel CPUs can't use iBOT due to hardware registers Intel must tap into for optimization. However, Intel says it plans on supporting the feature on future CPUs.
Intel initially rolled out iBOT with support for 12 games, which has now expanded to 19 titles. In our iBOT testing, we found that the feature offered an 8% average performance improvement, with the feature climbing as high as an 18% improvement in Shadow of the Tomb Raider.
Here are the games Intel added with the latest update:
- Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition
- The Callisto Protocol
- Homeworld 3
- Ori and the Will of the Wisps
- Little Nightmares III
- Warframe
- Hollow Knight: Silksong
Across the seven new games, Intel claims an average performance improvement of 12% with the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Intel tested at 1080p with High settings, and it used 32GB of DDR5-7200 memory and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090.
At the higher-end of the spectrum, Intel saw a 27% jump in Hollow Knight: Silksong and 16% improvement in Warframe. On the other end, Metro Exodus showed just a 2% uplift, while The Callisto Protocol jumped by 8%.
Intel's approach with iBOT might seem a bit scattershot, with 19 games now supported and no clear pattern between them. There are some popular and widely-played titles, such as Warframe and Cyberpunk 2077, but also less-demanding games like Silksong and older titles that don't see much play these games, like The Callisto Protocol. Even as the list expands, this strange mix is likely to stick around.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
That's due to how iBOT works. It's essentially a translation layer, not dissimilar from Microsoft Prism. However, Intel isn't translating instructions from one ISA to another. Instead, it's optimizing x86 applications to ensure they're using the latest, most efficient instructions. Intel does this optimization with Hardware Profile-Guided Optimizations, or HWPGO, tapping into the silicon to see what's going on while code is executing. Once Intel has its optimizations, it packages them into a profile and ships.
Although iBOT is a unique feature, it's not universally applicable. Some games (and applications, as iBOT works outside of games) are already optimized enough that iBOT provides no benefit. We've also seen performance differences between chips, even between the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. It would be interesting to see how the feature works on more constrained chips, such as Panther Lake.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Jake Roach is the Senior CPU Analyst at Tom’s Hardware, writing reviews, news, and features about the latest consumer and workstation processors.
-
usertests I'm not convinced that this feature will ever matter, but as long as they continue to work on it, good for the users.Reply
It would be interesting to see how the feature works on more constrained chips, such as Panther Lake.
Hollow Knight: Silksong can't be hard to run, right? I think I've seen ETA Prime test that or the previous one.
iBOT could be much more useful for Panther Lake and future mobile chips than Alder Lake Refresh, if it can allow you to achieve better performance at lower TDPs. -
usertests Reply
Yeah, shouldn't have anything to do with the GPU, it's all CPU-related.Gururu said:It's at processor level right, so good for all GPUs?
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000102604/processors.htmlProcessors supported by Intel® Binary Optimization Tool:Intel® Core™ Ultra 200 Plus Series processors (product formerly known as Arrow Lake Refresh).
Intel® Core™ Ultra 5 Processor 250K Plus
Intel® Core™ Ultra 5 Processor 250KF Plus
Intel® Core™ Ultra 7 Processor 270K Plus
Intel® Core™ Ultra 9 processor 290HX Plus
Intel® Core™ Ultra 7 processor 270HX PlusIntel® Core™ Ultra Processors (Series 3) (product formerly known as Panther Lake).
Intel® Core™ Ultra 7 Processor 356H
Intel® Core™ Ultra 9 Processor 386HNote
Intel® Arc™ G3 Processor Series are not supported for Intel® Application Optimization or Intel® Binary Optimization.
This is very weird information. Why not the the X9/X7 with big iGPUs, or any other Panther Lake chips? Why not the Core Ultra 7 366H, which is just a higher clocked 356H? And why not the Arc G3 handheld APUs? -
JakeRoach Reply
I will reach out to Intel and ask because that's a good question.usertests said:Yeah, shouldn't have anything to do with the GPU, it's all CPU-related.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000102604/processors.html
This is very weird information. Why not the the X9/X7 with big iGPUs, or any other Panther Lake chips? Why not the Core Ultra 7 366H, which is just a higher clocked 356H? And why not the Arc G3 handheld APUs? -
thestryker Reply
They already answered this question during the rollout: there was no point with anything that is always GPU limited. They purposely omitted all of the PTL CPUs with the big Graphics Tile and were only picking ones which would be used with dGPUs. The 366H seems like an omission unless it's a product that's effectively not really being sold.usertests said:This is very weird information. Why not the the X9/X7 with big iGPUs, or any other Panther Lake chips? Why not the Core Ultra 7 366H, which is just a higher clocked 356H? And why not the Arc G3 handheld APUs?
While I wish they'd just do it anyways I understand their choice as that is more validation they need to do.
SOTTR is an interesting case because of the metrics they pull during the benchmark which end up showing exactly what IBOT does despite the fps not changing much:
https://i.imgur.com/EpHi6qz.jpeghttps://i.imgur.com/7hDJNCw.jpeghttps://i.imgur.com/rLlsdwM.jpeg