Benchmark Results: Real-World Games
I ran these tests originally for our Ivy Bridge launch coverage, and then added HD Graphics 2500 results to fill in the blanks. After seeing just how bad the second-tier Ivy Bridge-based graphics engine performed, though, I stuck to just a single resolution: 1280x720.
The outcome isn’t pretty. Even in the face of relatively modest detail settings, HD Graphics 2500 isn’t something you’d want to use for gaming. At Batman’s lowest preset, our Core i5-3550 isn’t playable. In World of Warcraft, it’s both choppy and stuttery. Skyrim doesn’t offer much of an improvement.
Bottom line: whereas HD Graphics 4000 served up frames rates that made mainstream titles like WoW and Skyrim smooth enough to play at meager settings, HD Graphics 2500 just doesn’t make the proposition very compelling.
Actually a lot of sites have shown just what Chris is talking about. Even a dual core Pentium with a HD6670 beats the top end Llano piece (a quad core) even with CFX of the IGP with a HD6570. Llano is great for some things but overall in DT its only a low end entry level product and is much weaker per core and per clock than Intels CPUs.
What Chris did was pulled the same charts from his first IB review and added in the HD2500 (the new low end Intel IGP) for comparison.
If someone cannot take this information and realize that its just for comparison and that its not to show anything better, then thats their problem. If this was a Llano article, or the Trinity article when it comes out, you better believe Chris will do everything to check ever performance aspect. But its not. Its an article to see if the T and S models are worth it.
Overll, llano is overrate in my book. We have barley sold any at my work place. Just doesn't have the pulling power like a CPU and discrete GPU does.