Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

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

  • Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

    Phoronix: Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

    After delivering the Intel Core i7 4770K Haswell benchmarks on Ubuntu Linux this week already, which focused mostly on the processor performance, in this article are the first benchmarks of the Haswell OpenGL Linux performance. Testing was of the Intel HD Graphics 4600 graphics core found on the i7-4770K, which under Linux is supported by Intel's open-source driver.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18757

  • #2
    Why does the A10-5800K performs so poorly?

    I checked some directx benchmarks on internet and saw that it should perform better than the hd4000 and the hd4600.

    EDIT:

    I found why: the benchmark here is done with the open source driver.

    I think adding a line for the A10 and the catalyst driver would have been appropriate.

    Comment


    • #3
      Shouldn't Haswell be faster than is being demonstrated here? Were the performance improvements exaggerated by Intel or is the driver not quite ready yet?

      Comment


      • #4
        There are different graphic models. The benchmarks here feature the hd 4600, which is the slowest haswell model.
        Last edited by mannerov; 06-06-2013, 01:05 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mannerov View Post
          Why does the A10-5800K performs so poorly?

          I checked some directx benchmarks on internet and saw that it should perform better than the hd4000 and the hd4600.

          EDIT:

          I found why: the benchmark here is done with the open source driver.

          I think adding a line for the A10 and the catalyst driver would have been appropriate.
          This last-gen AMD APU should perform faster when using the latest improvements as the hand-tuned shaders...
          But I think a fair comparison should include the proprietary driver.

          Comment


          • #6
            Michael, pls add to phoronix min and max FPS, because showing avarage FPS is so noobish form of test. Why this simple feature couldn't be added since 2008?!
            I was stoping using phoronix to testing games because of lack of this.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mannerov View Post
              There are different graphic models. The benchmarks here feature the hd 4600, which is the slowest haswell model.
              The are still the HD4200 and HD4400 models that are slower, but the Iris Pro 5x00 are faster.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mannerov View Post
                Why does the A10-5800K performs so poorly?

                I checked some directx benchmarks on internet and saw that it should perform better than the hd4000 and the hd4600.

                EDIT:

                I found why: the benchmark here is done with the open source driver.

                I think adding a line for the A10 and the catalyst driver would have been appropriate.
                Take a look at the driver. It's insulting that anyone would use it and then do a comparison against the competition.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
                  Take a look at the driver. It's insulting that anyone would use it and then do a comparison against the competition.
                  It's a bit of an unfair comparison given that power management was likely forced to the lowest frequency and the R600-sb backend was not used. It only shows the default performance, not what it can do under ideal conditions (which is superior to Catalyst in most cases in my experience).
                  Last edited by AnonymousCoward; 06-06-2013, 01:41 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
                    Take a look at the driver. It's insulting that anyone would use it and then do a comparison against the competition.
                    I don't understand your point. I don't think it's insulting wanting to have an other line showing performance with the catalyst driver, since it will give a not unbiaised comparison (in all other benchmarks, A10 performs better than hd 4000).

                    Before seeing it was not the catalyst driver, I thought there was an issue somewhere.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The AMD oboard graphics are actually alot faster technically speaking than any Intel offerings, even the latest ones. The catalyst driver should definitely be thrown into the mix along side with the open source driver. Even still, catalyst in Linux does not perform even close to the Windows offering (overall) and it really pains me, because they would be the best bang-for-the buck systems otherwise.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by mannerov View Post
                        I don't understand your point. I don't think it's insulting wanting to have an other line showing performance with the catalyst driver, since it will give a not unbiaised comparison (in all other benchmarks, A10 performs better than hd 4000).

                        Before seeing it was not the catalyst driver, I thought there was an issue somewhere.
                        Catalyst will be added, did you guys read Michael's Article?

                        A much larger comparison of Haswell graphics against various discrete AMD Radeon and NVIDIA GeForce graphics cards will come in a later Phoronix article where testing will happen on the latest open-source and closed-source graphics drivers.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by enfocomp View Post
                          Even still, catalyst in Linux does not perform even close to the Windows offering (overall) and it really pains me, because they would be the best bang-for-the buck systems otherwise.
                          You hit the nail on the head. I think Intel's gap Windows vs Linux (OS) is smaller than the gap in AMD (Windows vs Linux Catalyst). On top of that, you have the huge gap (a factor 2 to 3 in many cases) between AMD Catalyst vs AMD OS. So, yes, whenever that comparison is published, it will be very useful. Haswell in Linux should work much faster as they add proper optimizations.

                          I need to upgrade my PC, and on the Hardware side, I see much better value in getting an A10-6800k (rather than an i5 Haswell), but the software is most likely going to kill it. I have nothing too philosophical against using binary drivers, but I've had so many little issues with both Nvidia and ATI that I avoid them like the plague. So, as it stands, the Haswell costs me 50% more and gives me twice the performance in graphics, and 50% more CPU. So, it's kinda like a better value. Of course, the total cost is higher, so I'll need to figure out whether I need the extra performance, or I can live with the A10-6800k. Decisions, decisions.
                          Last edited by mendieta; 06-06-2013, 03:15 PM. Reason: added a bit more detail

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by mendieta View Post
                            I have nothing too philosophical against using binary drivers, but I've had so many little issues with both Nvidia and ATI that I avoid them like the plague. So, as it stands, the Haswell costs me 50% more and gives me twice the performance in graphics, and 50% more CPU. So, it's kinda like a better value. Of course, the total cost is higher, so I'll need to figure out whether I need the extra performance, or I can live with the A10-6800k. Decisions, decisions.
                            I have exactly the same situation, running dual head, the Catalyst was completely unusable 2 years ago. I have no idea how it's now, but as I usually only watch movies and play HIB games, the lower performance is not so bad. I mean, at least it's consistent and I take it over fast if and when it works.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Is Intel going to put Iris Pro chips in their desktop CPUs? I'm hesitant to buy the Haswell CPUs when their integrated GPUs aren't the best. But if they'll never do it - no point to wait may be.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X