HD Video Quality Benchmark: HQV 2.0
When it comes to HD video playback, Radeon cards are the most highly regarded, according to our testing. Let’s concentrate in the differences between Sandy Bridge’s HD Graphics 3000 and Llano’s Radeon HD 6620G using the HQV 2.0 benchmark for comparison:
|HQV Benchmark version 2.0 Results (out of 210 possible)|
|Row 0 - Cell 0||AMD A8-3500M||Radeon HD 5670||Intel HD Graphics 3000|
|Test Class 1:Video Conversion||90||90||78|
|Test Class 2: Noise and Artifact Reduction||44||44||44|
|Test Class 3: Image Scaling and Enhancements||30||30||25|
|Test Class 4: Adaptive Processing||27||27||12|
This benchmark is not perfect in that it’s largely subjective. Having said that, you shouldn’t see more than 10 or 15 points difference between seasoned reviewers using the same hardware and driver versions.
So, how does Llano do? With 191 out of 210 possible points, it performs like a Radeon HD 5570, which is to say, quite well indeed.
The Intel HD Graphics 3000 scores 159 out of 210, which is significantly lower. We’re impressed with Intel HD Graphics 3000’s ability to handle noise and compression artifacts, and to optimize poor skin tones. On the other hand it disappointed us with poor 2:2 Film Resolution cadence support, substandard contrast enhancement, and terrible chroma up-sampling and scaling performance.
On top of this, Intel HD Graphics continues to suffer from Intel’s inability to support 23.976 FPS video playback, doubling a frame every 40 seconds. All things considered, AMD wins in this discipline.
....big win there...
Ditto on the "Good Job AMD" definitely on the right track.
The NDA is up on the 30th.
1) What happened to the Game Charts results for the Radeon HD 5570, when the games were benchmarked? I thought you made a point to say you were going to compare the APU's 6620G with a discrete card (that has the same number of SPs and same clock). So much for that, unless you thought only comparing the two with a synthetic test was enough. Oh well. Tom's can be such a tease!
2) I'm just a little disappointed that the APU's graphics power was not able to double Intel's.... Under the best of circumstances, AMD's latest integrated graphics came close to being twice as fast, but i guess that is ok since we are not playing horseshoes. I just thought it would be nice if it had made a nice even doubling, or more. Now, i'm worried IVY BRIDGE will beat it....
we ARE playing horseshoes...
and i have to give credit where credit is due: props to AMD for almost doubling Intel's HD Graphics in the integrated space....