HD Graphics 4000: Performance In 3DMark 11 And Batman
Because 3DMark 11 requires DirectX 11 support, Sandy Bridge-based CPUs can’t run it. That leaves us with the Core i7-3770K, AMD’s A8-3850, and a discrete Radeon HD 6570.
Despite Intel’s efforts to double graphics performance, the Core i7-3770K cannot outmaneuver AMD’s Llano-based A8-3850.
Here’s the funny thing: every time Intel advances its on-board graphics technology, I talk to industry insiders who worry that the processor company’s progress will completely kill off the entry-level discrete market. But a Radeon HD 6570, available for under $60, still manages to double Ivy Bridge’s best effort. At least on the desktop, even inexpensive add-in boards still have their place.
The Physics suite, which measures processor performance, is particularly interesting. Tons of testing over the past year tells us that Intel’s Sandy Bridge cores get a lot more work done per clock cycle than AMD’s. Llano’s mediocre performance consequently isn’t news. However, the fact that Core i7-3770K picks up more than 2000 points with a discrete GPU installed is a good indication that the integrated core’s thermal requirements limit what the IA cores can do.
In a real-world game like Batman: Arkham City, HD Graphics 4000 nearly does manage to catch AMD’s A8-3850. But generating playable average frame rates requires the title’s lowest possible detail settings and fairly unattractive resolutions. In contrast, even a cheap Radeon HD 6570 can handle entry-level detail at up to 1920x1080.
Looking forward to the further information coming out this week on Ivy Bridge, as I was initially planning on buying Ivy Bridge, but now I might turn to Sandy Bridge-E
Temps as expected are high on the IB, but better than early ES which is very good.
Those with their SB or SB-E (K/X) should be feeling good about now ;)
Now, time to read the review. :D
I really wish they would introduce a gaming platform between their stupidly overpriced x79esque server platform and the integrated graphics chips they are pushing mainstream. 50% more transistors should be 30% or so more performance or a much smaller chip, but gamers get nothing out of Ivy Bridge.
They're using their process to get to places they'll need to get to in the future
I have a few things on my mind.
1.) AMD - C'mon and get it together, you need to do better...2.) imagine if Intel made an i7-2660K or something like the i5-2550K they have now.
3.) SB-E is not for gaming (too highly priced...) compared to i7 or i5 Sandy Bridge
4.) Ivy Bridge runs hot.......
5.) IB average 3.7% faster than i7 SB and only 16% over i5 SB = not worth it
6.) AMD - C'mon and get it together, you need to do better...
To me it shows 2 main things. 1) that Ivy didn't improve on Sandy Bridge as much as Intel was hoping it would, and 2) just how far behind AMD actually is...
Yea yea I know most apps won't use 8 cores, but that's only because there was no 8 cores processors in past, not the other way around