Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 51

Thread: Intel Haswell HD Graphics 4600 Performance On Ubuntu Linux

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,382

    Default 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. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    168

    Default

    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.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24

    Default

    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?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    168

    Default

    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 at 02:05 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Quote 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.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    26

    Default

    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.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote 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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote 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.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote 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 at 02:41 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Quote 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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •