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

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

    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.

  • #2
    Thats nothing really new. But you also don't buy laptops with amd onchip gpu for games. Most of the times you have got a desktop system with dedicated card for games - or at least a laptop with dedicated chip - which are really a bad idea as only for U are test solutions available to enable the chip. D does not allow parallel install of gfx drivers. So why should somebody really care about it? More important is accellerated video playback support to save energy - as extra bonus you get since snb i3 even a very fast encoder - i saw gb is working on gstreamer encode support for linux, vaapi exposes that interface as well, but my early speed tests have been a bit disappointing on linux. Using win it is really very fast when you maybe want to do a smaller version of your hd homevideo for your mobile device. I never used an app that uses gstreamer but maybe i try when it is done.

    Comment


    • #3
      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.

      Comment


      • #4
        And how fast is the intel for real?
        Meaning: With today's intel driver vs today's radeon open source driver.

        Also, you left out the part where Quanta tries to sue AMD for letting their graphics chip run too hot.

        Comment


        • #5
          Disappointing for Ivy.

          Comment


          • #6
            Wasn't the latest AMD processor architecture a major failure? Plus, the power consumption and heat was considerably high even for a mobile chip. Intel's bread and butter is the cpu and processing power. Even if they're 'incompetent' at building a mGPU, AMD can't seem to build a competitive cpu particularly a mobile chip version.

            Their graphics divisions are good but they can't seem to release a decent driver. I guess no one is perfect.

            It still seems odd to me to put great effort into getting a 'gaming' laptop. Currently, it doesn't seem like any manufacturers do that very well. Heat and power consumption is a challenge even for basic laptops.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Kano View Post
              Thats nothing really new. But you also don't buy laptops with amd onchip gpu for games. Most of the times you have got a desktop system with dedicated card for games - or at least a laptop with dedicated chip - which are really a bad idea as only for U are test solutions available to enable the chip. D does not allow parallel install of gfx drivers. So why should somebody really care about it? More important is accellerated video playback support to save energy - as extra bonus you get since snb i3 even a very fast encoder - i saw gb is working on gstreamer encode support for linux, vaapi exposes that interface as well, but my early speed tests have been a bit disappointing on linux. Using win it is really very fast when you maybe want to do a smaller version of your hd homevideo for your mobile device. I never used an app that uses gstreamer but maybe i try when it is done.
              "But you also don't buy laptops with amd onchip gpu for games."

              why not? there are many people with no money for an extra Desktop system with an extra expensiv gtx580 graphik card.

              there are million of people with only money for 1 single notebook.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ChrisXY View Post
                And how fast is the intel for real?
                Meaning: With today's intel driver vs today's radeon open source driver.
                i don't know the intel hardware is to new to test this.

                Originally posted by ChrisXY View Post
                Also, you left out the part where Quanta tries to sue AMD for letting their graphics chip run too hot.
                simple answer: Quanta will lose in court. because they are incompetent to.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by curaga View Post
                  Disappointing for Ivy.
                  intel do have another viewpoint: they just point out that hd4000 is 50-100% faster than intels hd3000.

                  but following the intel logic is this: a speed up from 0 fps to 1 fps is a UNLIMITED SPEED UP!!!! LOL

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Panix View Post
                    Wasn't the latest AMD processor architecture a major failure? Plus, the power consumption and heat was considerably high even for a mobile chip. Intel's bread and butter is the cpu and processing power. Even if they're 'incompetent' at building a mGPU, AMD can't seem to build a competitive cpu particularly a mobile chip version.

                    Their graphics divisions are good but they can't seem to release a decent driver. I guess no one is perfect.

                    It still seems odd to me to put great effort into getting a 'gaming' laptop. Currently, it doesn't seem like any manufacturers do that very well. Heat and power consumption is a challenge even for basic laptops.
                    i think you don't have any clue about this tropic: "Intel's "cripple AMD" function" http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49

                    AMD processor architecture are only a major failure because Intel cripple AMD and also intel force amd to make the cpus incompatible to intels instruction set: "Stop the instruction set war" http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=25

                    In Fact you are complete incompetent to arguing against amd's CPU Architecture.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I really don't see the millions hardcore gamers that can only afford one notebook. Those simply spend 200 on a console and are usually happy with that. I know some hardcore gamers that just want to play and not to update gfx drivers and/or wait for patches just to be able to play the games. Especially amd has shown very bad opengl game support. Rage was released a few month ago and the recommended driver is still a "preview", now called 12.1a. id seems to wait for amd to publish a FINAL driver with all fixes before they ship the 2nd update for Rage. As opengl driver quality also matters for linux i would prefer to add an extra nvidia card. It does not need to be the fastest card, usually gtx 460 and above should be able to handle most of the top games with all effects enabled at full hd res. Intel onboard certainly does not, also amd onboard solutions are definitely nothing for full hd with everything turned on, maybe on lowest detail.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kano View Post
                        I really don't see the millions hardcore gamers that can only afford one notebook.
                        not hardcore gamers but there are millions of gamers.
                        and amd is selling well to these people.

                        Originally posted by Kano View Post
                        Those simply spend 200 on a console and are usually happy with that.
                        I don't think so. gaming consoles are a underclass uneducated people phenomenon.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Even HD3000 is still much faster than AMD's fastest apu using OSS drivers.
                          We need better drivers...
                          ## VGA ##
                          AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                          Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I really want to know which "millions" of gamers you mean, any statistics you have got where amd trinity chips are more important than intel gpus? If you look at

                            http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

                            they must be below 0.5% - just like the snb ones. the older intel mobile series 4 chips use at least 1.5% of the steam users. For browser games you dont need statistics, they run everywhere.
                            Last edited by Kano; 01-18-2012, 05:51 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              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.
                              Yeah, especially when HE writes LIKE THIS.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X