Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Intel Iris Pro 5200 vs. HD Graphics 4600

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,369

    Default Intel Iris Pro 5200 vs. HD Graphics 4600

    Phoronix: Intel Iris Pro 5200 vs. HD Graphics 4600

    After several weeks of testing the Linux-friendly System76 Gazelle Pro Haswell laptop, we've now been using the System76 Galago UltraPro for a wide variety of Linux testing as its powered by the Core i7 4750HQ CPU with Iris Pro 5200 graphics. In the preview article for this System76 ultrabook we ran some early comparative tests while in this article are some direct Ubuntu 13.10 comparison benchmarks between System76's two Intel Haswell laptops. What's most interesting to see with these results is how much faster the Iris Pro graphics are over HD Graphics 4600.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19132

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    394

    Default

    very nice.

    Intel is finally catching up to nvidia and amd. I wonder what would be the equivalent to these.

    And probably no need for Optimus and that sort of stuff anymore.
    Last edited by madjr; 09-22-2013 at 09:10 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    221

    Default

    Yes, good bench. What about battery life/power usage? Actually that may not be worth testing because from what I've heard the Galago is quite crappy in that regard, but testing another notebook with Iris Pro graphics would be quite interesting.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by madjr View Post
    very nice.

    Intel is finally catching up to nvidia and amd. I wonder what would be the equivalent to these.

    And probably no need for Optimus and that sort of stuff anymore.
    Yeah, and by catching up, you really mean in graphics of course. But they also provide killer CPU's. So, the whole package of a Killer CPU and gaming graphics all in one package is already here. We've been saying that for some time, but the future is here, now

    A couple months ago I upgraded my desktop to a Hawell i5-4670k (no discrete graphics). Next upgrade will be to something like the Iris Pro or a similar AMD solution assuming AMD improves the CPU side, but in about 3 years, so things will be even much better (I have a feeling discrete graphics will be a dinosaur at that time - sorry, NVIDIA).

    Cheers!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    A couple months ago I upgraded my desktop to a Hawell i5-4670k (no discrete graphics).
    This CPU have integrated Intel HD4600:
    http://ark.intel.com/products/75048/

    Intel "K" CPUs lack of some features like VT-d, but they all have integrated graphics anyway.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Arctic circle, Finland
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Nice comparison there, i presume that gap will increase if using mesa 9.3 dev?

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    Yeah, and by catching up, you really mean in graphics of course. But they also provide killer CPU's. So, the whole package of a Killer CPU and gaming graphics all in one package is already here. We've been saying that for some time, but the future is here, now

    A couple months ago I upgraded my desktop to a Hawell i5-4670k (no discrete graphics). Next upgrade will be to something like the Iris Pro or a similar AMD solution assuming AMD improves the CPU side, but in about 3 years, so things will be even much better (I have a feeling discrete graphics will be a dinosaur at that time - sorry, NVIDIA).

    Cheers!
    I kind of doubt it, if 1440p goes mainstream and 4k is new high end not to mention 3 or more display configs. Power of discrete is still needed for distant future.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    196

    Default

    Very nice, but not yet enough to replace discrete GPUs in high end systems.

    With such powerful integrated graphics co-processors, it would be very nice if games could simultaneously use discrete GPUs for graphics and the integrated GPU for GPGPU computations.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    Posts
    129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuke81 View Post
    Nice comparison there, i presume that gap will increase if using mesa 9.3 dev?
    Probably not a ton at the moment - it's early in the cycle and most of the work since 9.2 has focused on features so far.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    61

    Default

    Is that right?
    The clock speed of the INTEL CORE I7-4750HQ was 800Mhz lower than the INTEL CORE I7-4900MQ.
    The HQ also has 2MB less cache, and the GPU clock speed was 100Mhz lower than that of the MQ - and still it wiped the floor with the MQ in some games.

    If that's right, just imagine them running at same clockspeed :P

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuke81 View Post
    I kind of doubt it, if 1440p goes mainstream and 4k is new high end not to mention 3 or more display configs. Power of discrete is still needed for distant future.
    Oh, I wasn't clear. I think there will be a niche market for discrete cards, not only for high end gaming, but also for graphics workstations. But the pace at which the integrated graphics have started covering the needs of mainstream users is outstanding. And I don't see the trend slowing down, but rather gaining steam.

    Gaming consoles are a great example of how far things went, already. They are all running APU's.

    Cheers!

Posting Permissions

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