Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Five Year Old NVIDIA GPU Can Still Beat Broadwell HD Graphics 5500

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by riklaunim View Post
    To get real max Intel GPU performance I would check it for a non-ultrabook CPU. In the Ivy Bridge series difference between U and M was sometimes big
    Yeah Thinkpad W is the workstation line, the W510 weighs 3.5kg with PSU. Not an equal comparison to compare it to an ultralight. The W is designed for serious work - good cooling fans, and the PSU can supply enough power to run the system at top speed without throttling or drawing power from the battery (most laptops will draw power from the battery when the usage exceeds the psu capacity, the W solves this by having a huge psu that weighs more than some ultralight laptops)

    Comment


    • #22
      A Five Year Old NVIDIA GPU Can Still Beat Broadwell HD Graphics 5500

      If youre going to buy a graphics card, just get the best one you can. So Id say just get a 780Ti since that thing is a monster

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by anderson View Post
        If youre going to buy a graphics card, just get the best one you can. So Id say just get a 780Ti since that thing is a monster
        Get the best one!... Recommends Kepler...

        Comment


        • #24
          Kepler is outdated, Maxwell gen 2 is current (GM2..)

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by cocklover View Post
            Intel Onboard graphic are a Joke, even if We stop our development, it will toke 10 years to Intel catch us. Nvidia.

            There are so many noobs thinking that his onboard cards can run the latest games, Is so funny.
            It's worse than that. Pretty much every single mac notebook now only comes with shit iGPU unless you spend an insane amount and then you only get low-mid range mobile and a couple gen back(as of last week).

            Comment


            • #26
              Maybe you did not consider a few facts: desktop systems with the same GPU don't have got the same the TDP. That means throtteling will appear later, increases speed. If you add faster RAM you gain speed as well. All that will not give more speed than dedicated gfx cards below midrage, I see Haswell on desktop systems in the range of a GT 630 Kepler, can not check Broadwell. Tesselation is too extreme for the dedicated and the onboard chip, even if both support it on Windows - if you don't like slideshows. The main reason for Broadwell is the shrink to 14 nm (from Haswell 22nm) with lowered power usage - to get better real specs i would wait for Skylake. Most likely Apple will get Skylake first this year - they need it for HDMI 2.0 and Broadwell is useless in that case.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by cocklover View Post
                Intel Onboard graphic are a Joke, even if We stop our development, it will toke 10 years to Intel catch us. Nvidia.

                There are so many noobs thinking that his onboard cards can run the latest games, Is so funny.
                I don't understand people who say Intel integrated graphics is a joke.
                It is not.
                Sure, it is not as good as a dedicated graphics card, but it works surprisingly well.

                I got the Intel Haswell 4770K desktop CPU and I can do casual gaming on this.

                Originally posted by cutterjohn View Post
                It's worse than that. Pretty much every single mac notebook now only comes with shit iGPU unless you spend an insane amount and then you only get low-mid range mobile and a couple gen back(as of last week).
                I don't know about Intel integrated graphics on laptops, but on the desktop it is decent, its pretty good performance.

                Comment


                • #28
                  I had Nvidia multimedia graphics adapter, not really gaming adapter, 620-series, and it was in real gaming use a little bit better than Intel's onboard Haswell. Got in January (for free) my friends old Nvidia GTX 260, from 2008, and it beats much newer 620 in every way (according to some tests about 10x performance). Ok, that was dedicated gaming card, and so on. But it is 7 years old. How long it would take untill Intel onboard graphics have same performance as dedicated gaming graphics adapter from 2008? Ten years? Five Years?

                  Yes you can play some quite modern games with Intel onboard graphics, or with that cheap multimedia adapter. But better turn of nearly all eye-candy or tolerate something like 15fps...

                  I have Core-i5 4460.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    You should not compare midrange with entry level. Your GTX 260 was around 200 $ and a GT 620 around 40 $. Did you ever compare the specs? The old one can not use OpenGL 4 and the new one would be too slow for that. The GT 620 was just a renamed Fermi, not even Kepler.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      I know that 620 was cheapo GPU, and GTX 260 was when it was new somewhat expensive. But still same old GTX 260 is much more faster than quite much newer entry-level GPU, and likewise way faster than 2014 desktop CPU graphics.
                      Still I wonder when entry level GPU's or processor onboard graphics will advance to same performance as quite old gaming GPU? Still seems there is quite big performance gap.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X