Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Intel Iris Pro 5200 vs. HD Graphics 4600

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Nice set of benchmarks Michael.

    Quote Originally Posted by UraniumDeer View Post
    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
    detail checking aside (though, at casual glance, they do look right), what the published results aptly demonstrate, in respect to that for a large number of games, is where the performance limiting facet lies ... i.e. it ain't the processor
    .

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    Michael, your earlier article showed that the eDRAM was not yet working. The increase here is most likely due to the 5200 having twice the amount of EUs.

    Ie, the Iris Pro will hopefully get a lot better once the cache is working.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Arctic circle, Finland
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kayden View Post
    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.
    Yeah, just checked earlier phoronix bench. It was comparison between mesa 9.1 vs 9.3dev and this test was run on mesa 9.2.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    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!
    It's not that we see some kind of breakthrough with APUs, they are able to play mainstream games because consoles have stagnated the market. Seriously, XBox 360 is 8 years old now! And Xbone is even weaker compared to regular PC than Xbox 360 was at its launch.

    In other words, it would be a sign of something being deeply wrong with the APU market if the current situation didn't happen.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Does the Galago battery provide power consumption info? I hope to see power consumption details in your review.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    304

    Default

    intel is very expensive for what it gives, I prefer amd cpu + nvidia mid range card.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Intel Iris Pro 5200 does not compare to Discrete GPGPUs. Not by a long shot. Never will they ever touch Nvidia or AMD.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pandev92 View Post
    intel is very expensive for what it gives, I prefer amd cpu + nvidia mid range card.
    With the growth of HSA I'll always prefer FX processors with a GPGPU [the Steamroller/Excavator architecture moving forward] over anything Intel hobbles together.

Posting Permissions

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