Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

50% slower than AMD! Intel FAIL again with the HD4000 graphic hardware.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
    In my point of view Intel is just Incompetent they just can't build fast GPU's
    Afaik, they're not even trying. Their GPUs are licensed from PowerVR or something.
    But if you want to talk about "incompetent" maybe we should look at some market share charts. And I'm not talking just CPUs here, intel is present in market where AMD doesn't even exist (e.g. GPS nav). Market share not good enough? We can try revenue instead.

    Comment


    • #17
      Thats not fully correct, intel has got some atom chips with powervr core, all other gfx cores are not licenced. But for win use the powervr drivers must really suck, only 32 bit possible, dx9 support even with dx11 hardware. flash does not seem to be accellerated yet and hdmi (hdcp) support is missing - in order to play bluray... I really want know if powervr manages to improve those drivers, for opengl (on android) they seem to be much better. And you should not forget there will be win 8 systems with arm core - those usually have got the same graphics solutions, so pvr has got something to do the next month as well

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
        http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Proze...r-1407338.html

        Intel Core i7-3920XM HD4000=3DMark11 P615
        AMD A8 HD6620G=3DMark11 P1625

        In my point of view Intel is just Incompetent they just can't build fast GPU's

        AMD beat Intel with 1 year old stuff and I think Intel need another year or 2 to get the other 50% speed to.
        I don't understand the premise of the article: in 3D intensive applications, with DX 11, you can likely get "up-to" 50 percent extra performance. This is not that bad and not that good, is the same difference between pre-Sandy Bridge and Sandy Bridge. Even SB offers decent graphics, I use SB to my external 1920x1200 display, and is not slow for whatever Fedora/Gnome 3 is capable: non shuttering animations, and so on. There is a hardware that is 50% faster (like Ivy Bridge!?), I think is not noticeable. There is a hardware that is even extra 50% faster. So on graphics Intel is one generation after AMD, but on CPU is one in front. Also, Ivy comes with lower TDP, if the future will stand as Intel talks, and this would mean, that games will work basically the same (as a bit faster CPU will compensate the "strong" Bulldozer core on laptops).
        At the end I do hope to appear a general purpose laptop that can install Ubuntu (or any other popular distro like Fedora or openSuse) using ARM, and include nice hardware like NVidia Kal-El, I don't want the ultimate APU to look on Youtube, edit a document in LibreOffice or reading email. And when I'm working I will still work with higher end workstation which does not take advantage of the integrated graphics.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by ciplogic View Post
          I don't understand the premise of the article: in 3D intensive applications, with DX 11, you can likely get "up-to" 50 percent extra performance. This is not that bad and not that good, is the same difference between pre-Sandy Bridge and Sandy Bridge. Even SB offers decent graphics, I use SB to my external 1920x1200 display, and is not slow for whatever Fedora/Gnome 3 is capable: non shuttering animations, and so on. There is a hardware that is 50% faster (like Ivy Bridge!?), I think is not noticeable. There is a hardware that is even extra 50% faster. So on graphics Intel is one generation after AMD, but on CPU is one in front. Also, Ivy comes with lower TDP, if the future will stand as Intel talks, and this would mean, that games will work basically the same (as a bit faster CPU will compensate the "strong" Bulldozer core on laptops).
          At the end I do hope to appear a general purpose laptop that can install Ubuntu (or any other popular distro like Fedora or openSuse) using ARM, and include nice hardware like NVidia Kal-El, I don't want the ultimate APU to look on Youtube, edit a document in LibreOffice or reading email. And when I'm working I will still work with higher end workstation which does not take advantage of the integrated graphics.
          ""up-to" 50 percent extra performance."

          means its the slow hd3000+50%

          this is just marketing speech first you put a product with 0 FPS and a product with 1FPS and then you make a commercial with an "unlimited" speed up.

          in absolute numbers its just slow.

          its so slow intel need to cheat with an video played in a VLC player;



          Intel just FAIL!
          Last edited by Qaridarium; 01-18-2012, 07:46 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Sounds like someone was trolled into buying bulldozer and needs to justify his awful purchase.

            Maybe it's worth waiting until Intel have actually finished the Ivy Bridge drivers before judging them.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by scottishduck View Post
              Sounds like someone was trolled into buying bulldozer and needs to justify his awful purchase.
              i do not have buyed a bulldozer yet. and you can read in this forum my favor "bulldozer" i like is the Opteron 6204 with all "bulldozer like" features turned off.

              i wait. in mid 2012 ->2013 amd will push out a quatchannel desktop socket this means i use my "PhenomII x4 B50" and next year i will buy a new system.

              Comment


              • #22
                Maybe you should ask AMD why you can not use a Bulldozer or whatever cpu without external gfx card when you want to use AMD-Vi. All supported chipsets like 890FX, all series 9 do not have onboard vga. And those funny FM1 boards use cpus which are not faster than the normal Athlons (just with much higher price) combined with a gfx core. Of course for laptops those cpus should be enough, at least when you use win to get all accelleration features

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Kano View Post
                  Maybe you should ask AMD why you can not use a Bulldozer or whatever cpu without external gfx card when you want to use AMD-Vi. All supported chipsets like 890FX, all series 9 do not have onboard vga. And those funny FM1 boards use cpus which are not faster than the normal Athlons (just with much higher price) combined with a gfx core. Of course for laptops those cpus should be enough, at least when you use win to get all accelleration features
                  i google it.. and i found nothing like amd-vi?

                  do you mean IOMMU ?
                  or AMD-V ?

                  IOMMU is a chipset feature not a CPU feature, the 890FX supports it and all 900 chips support it.
                  AMD-V is the visualisation feature all 45nm and better cpus support it.

                  i read about problems with the IOMMU feature in the past and the source is some mainboard builder company disable it and only enable it in the high-priced version.

                  but amd is not the source of the problem.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                    i wait. in mid 2012 ->2013 amd will push out a quatchannel desktop socket this means i use my "PhenomII x4 B50" and next year i will buy a new system.
                    Sandybridge ex does exactly this.
                    I suspect it is one of things that bottlenecks bulli.

                    Second is huge intercache latencies and weak internal associativity.

                    Third is weak overall power management. The CPU seems to do it right, most of times; but chipset recklessly burns all energy away.

                    Fourth and most important absent logic: modify internal CPU scheduler to overload modules with tasks till they are 100% and only then go to next modules.
                    That way part of modules will perform 20-100% and rest sleep at 0% till they are really needed.
                    This needs internal CPU scheduler to break whatever OS scheduler core-thread association thinks is right and feeds and do it on its own instead - reassign each task manually.
                    Last edited by crazycheese; 01-22-2012, 09:08 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                      Sandybridge ex does exactly this.
                      I suspect it is one of things that bottlenecks bulli.

                      Second is huge intercache latencies and weak internal associativity.

                      Third is weak overall power management. The CPU seems to do it right, most of times; but chipset recklessly burns all energy away.

                      Fourth and most important absent logic: modify internal CPU scheduler to overload modules with tasks till they are 100% and only then go to next modules.
                      That way part of modules will perform 20-100% and rest sleep at 0% till they are really needed.
                      This needs internal CPU scheduler to break whatever OS scheduler core-thread association thinks is right and feeds and do it on its own instead - reassign each task manually.
                      most of your point are only true on: WINDOWS;;;

                      whatever it doesn’t matter in 2-3 months amd will bring a new quatchannel desktop socket and a octachannel server socket.

                      the bulldozer successor will perform well on the new sockets with new chip-sets.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Q does have a point in this thread. A CPU with a good integrated GPU is *much* better than dealing with Optimus crap.

                        AMD's Fusion GPUs are good enough that you don't need a dedicated GPU unless you are a hardcore gamer. Intel's Sandy Bridge may be 10-30% faster than AMD's Llano clock for clock, but Llano's GPU is ~100-200% faster than SB's which makes for a much better all-around performer (that can run modern games in 'medium' settings).

                        That's one part of the equation. The other is drivers, where Intel faces significant problems. One year later and Sandy Bridge still fails to vsync properly and still suffers from graphics corruption (esp. in Gnome Shell). The new Atoms are equipped with a DX10/GL3 PowerVR GPU - but guess what. Intel delayed them due to 'driver issues' and finally announced they will only support DX9 (no OpenGL!) and 32-bit Windows. No Linux, no 64-bit, just 32-bit Windows.

                        And that's why you don't buy Intel GPUs: their drivers suck. At least with AMD you know you'll get decent support on Linux (with open-source drivers - fglrx sucks) and great support on Windows. No such guarantees with Intel.
                        Last edited by BlackStar; 01-23-2012, 03:09 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Q, I am waiting for the AMD announcement today

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            So you really call AMD win drivers great? Maybe for DX games, but not for OpenGL. Rage was released 4th oct 11, but there are still only "preview" drivers to run that game. Those drivers with additional char behind usually contain code of the driver that will be out +1 month later. They do absolutely not manage to fix the OpenGL part, no they introduce new bugs, at least for hd 5670 and 11-12. Intel is not perfect too, hopefully there will be a working X stack combination soon. xvba in fglrx is definitely not that advanced, missing h264 l5.1 support. intel already exposes h264 encoding profiles via vaapi, but i am waiting for the killer app for linux yet to use it.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I suggest to Phoronix that they make a new phoronix Platinum Edition, a little more expensive than Phoronix Premium, but with no Qaridarium posts at all.
                              I bet they would get more income.

                              Of course, they would need to remove the ignore feature, which i'm about to start using now.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                                I stopped reading Q's posts long ago. Some months back, he was making some semi-good posts. Now he's just trolling all over the place.
                                Good idea.

                                One gets the impression that AMD is struggling just from reading comments on various forums of related discussions and the most recent feedback on bulldozer.

                                But, even the Quanta report should be reason for concern.

                                http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/5/268...e-chip-lawsuit
                                http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...computers.html

                                My impression was that AMD OSS drivers was still a mess in Linux compared to using Intel. At least, for using more recent AMD laptops. I notice more reports of problems in the AMD OSS section here than Intel's.

                                Apple also uses Intel for their machines.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X