1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hardware Intel GMA HD Graphics Performance

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 25 Jan 2010.

  1. xcomdyana

    xcomdyana New Member

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    still not fair.. you are comparing an integrated gpu on cpu with a non integrated gpu on cpu.. the benchmark is invalid because of AMD still doesnt have the FUSION yet.. wait till FUSION is on.. then you start comparing.. and for the driver part i have been using version 9.12 since the release and i dont have a single problem that you have encounter in your benchmark.. finally.. you are comparing an Apple with an Orange.. make sure you under-clock the gpu on intel so that all the gpu have the same frequencies.. even a kindergarten can do it..
     
  2. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    Then it would be evaluating the potential of a single CPU, in a single environment, not what you buy. It would invalidate the power consumption results, because what voltage would we run it at? We all know that there is plenty of overhead from Intel's 32nm CPUs - moreso than AMD - and we covered that recently in our 661/530 review. We will cover it again in the future in a specific 530 and 32nm Pentium article. It was not the focus of this feature, which was simply a product analysis. ;)

    It works perfectly from what I can tell - Intel has always been higher in every PowerDVD playback test we've ever run. I pulled the latest PowerDVD from Cyberlink with all the latest updates and it said ClearVideo was enabled when playing back.

    Xcom, you are exhibiting purchase justification syndrome my friend. ;) For starters - Fuzion isn't around for another 18 months, minimum, whereas these products are available to buy now. In addition, Intel's on-die GPU is simply the same northbridge as G45 (+2 shaders), but die shrunk and now uses a QPI link to the CPU, instead of front side bus. Even if it was integrated into the GPU - having a product the competition doesn't that you can buy means the results are valid because this is technology of today. It's precisely why we don't adjust clock speeds - we're not looking at the technical efficiency of their pipelines on a clock to clock basis, this is a product analysis.

    Fuzion is already 2 years late, until we see silicon - something we maintain equally across every product from every company - it's just a powerpoint presentation like Larrabee, and a wet dream of AMD enthusiasts.

    Krayzie - I realise that, but Crysis is a hardcore game not a casual one. I only did MW2 because it's popular and made for all products. Showing Crysis barely playable on any IGP is not really a measure of much, since we were focusing on what games people might want to really play on integrated graphics :)

    Java - our conclusions as well. We point out on the last page that the AMD solution offers great value for money, but for those who really, really want the extra features like bit-streaming Intel offers this and ClearVideo has fantastic de-interlacing.

    One button overclocking is an option, yes, but at what voltage and cost to efficiency? The extrapolation of data is numerous and something that requires a whole separate article to cover in itself.
     
  3. Corbendallas

    Corbendallas New Member

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you very much for some interesting reading. This was exactly the comparison I have been looking for. Great job!
    Right now I'm sitting with an Atom 330 and nVidia ION which works great.
    However I am looking into maybe getting a setup with a bit more "grunt" in the CPU area and would like a CPU that can play HD material on "raw power" in case hardware acceleration doesn't work.
    Would a core i3 be sufficient for this?
     
  4. thewelshbrummie

    thewelshbrummie Active Member

    Joined:
    29 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    374
    Likes Received:
    30
    Excellent stuff, I was waiting for a review of the GPU core in the i3 before buying one for an MCE build. I'd been intending on going the nVidia 9400 route but the power consumption figures and better raw speed of the i3 chips compared to an equivalent price AMD setup (and nVidia 9400 boards not being available anymore, along with having been more expensive) have swung it for the H55/i3, especially as I want something fast to encode video at the same time. It looks like the i3 530 do it fast enough.

    It's a nice sound! I'll be ordering mine at the weekend.

    @corbendallas - based on this review the i3 530's GPU core more than holds its own decoding 1080p so it's by far the best option & makes me wonder why Intel have bothered with the i5 661 - it has a higher TDP and whilst it's GPU core may be faster, if the i3 530 can decode 1080p flawlessly, why bother spending the extra cash on the 661 for a MCE or genereal use PC?
     
  5. javaman

    javaman May irritate Eyes

    Joined:
    10 May 2009
    Posts:
    3,632
    Likes Received:
    100
    np, bindi. Think I mis read that point then. My bad
     
  6. monkee

    monkee New Member

    Joined:
    2 Feb 2010
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    There appears to be something wrong with your CPU utilisation (and therefore power consumption) numbers for the i3 and i5 cpus - i am sitting here with a laptop equipped with a core i5 520m and the latest version of Arcsoft and am seeing utilisation of between 8 and 12% utilisation whilst playing back an h.264 encoded film (watchmen).

    I'm 100% sure that on my previous machine with GMAX4500 I only ever saw utilisation in the 15 - 20% range also when using PowerDVD so I don't follow the remarks made about utilisation always being high with Intel Gfx.

    Would have been good if you had compared more game titles too, seriously it's interesting to see how something like modern warfare performs, but in reality why not show more games that people with low powered integrated graphics are likely to play? For what it's worth, I've just played through 3 campaigns of Left 4 Dead 2 and have been amazed that it was actually playable and looked good (at 1366*768 medium settings). FPS was hovering around 20fps which sound v low, but it was surprisingly smooth.... considering I play on an i7 machine with a 5870 normally, I was pleasantly surprised... GMAX4500 never delivered anything close.

    I can't help feeling that we might even see more performance as Intel have finally appeared to have sorted out their drivers to a point where games actually don't not work now.... ;-)
     
  7. aj-thekid

    aj-thekid New Member

    Joined:
    9 May 2010
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    is Spanish

    Super Brillante el Trabajo y tiempo que se tomaron para correr estos examenes en las tarjetas graficas

    felicidades por su gran trabajo en comparaciones y sigan asi

    Dios los Bendigas

    [Edit by Hex using dodgy google translate]

    Super Bright Work and the time it took to run these tests on graphics cards

    congratulations on your great job and keep up the comparisons

    God Bless

    [/edit - please try to keep to English on these boards, or at least stick an English translation in :thumb: ]
     
  8. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    Thank You, AJ :)
     
  9. umeshluck911

    umeshluck911 New Member

    Joined:
    5 Jun 2010
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi there,

    I have a laptop with core i3 2.21MHz proc. with 3Gb RAM & 1270 Gb graphics (INTEL GRAPHIC ACCELERATOR HD CORE i3 ) I want to know can I play NFS shift & call of duty modern warfare 2 in this laptop?

    Please help me.
     
  10. CSMR

    CSMR New Member

    Joined:
    22 Oct 2008
    Posts:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    In case anyone reads this thread:
    You've got this totally wrong.

    AMD integrated and discrete graphics have been able to play h264 and VC-1 video with DXVA correctly under MPC-HC for at least 2 years.

    Intel (x4500 or HD graphics) can play neither with DXVA.
    With current MPC-HC, VC-1 DXVA is impossible.
    h264 is not correct: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/mpc-hc/ticket/168
    (And I have personally confirmed this with HD graphics.)

    Basically DirectX does not work on Intel integrated graphics. Some bits are supported but it's not complete. Appalling.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page