Are Intels HD Graphics self-limiting?

[TheDarkKnight]

I have been spending a lot of time researching Intels "HD Graphics" so that I can make the best purchasing decision for my next CPU.

A couple of things I have questions about are the relationships between the number of EUs(execution units) in each series of "HD Graphics" and the maximum memory bandwidth(GB/s) of the different generations of "HD Graphics" technologies.

So, the 7th generation of Intels "HD Graphics", which would have come with IyBridge CPUs had a ratio of 6 EUs/25.6 GB/s in memory bandwidth to Intels 7th generation of Haswell "HD Graphics" of 10EUs/25.6 GB/s in memory bandwidth.

To summarzie:
IvyBridge HD Graphics 6EU/25.6GB/s memory bandwidth
Haswell HD Graphics 10EU/25.6GB/s memory bandwidth

Which of these configurations is most evenly matched to each other. I am assuming that 6EUs were not enough to saturate the 25.6GB/s memory bandwidth of the IvyBridge HD Graphics so they boosted it up to 10 to utilize more of that bandwidth? OR...my second guess, is that the bandwidth was already capable of being saturated with only 6EUs and they boosted the number of EUs on the Haswell "HD Graphics" just to make it look better. Less likely scenario though. If the first is true, that 6 EUs was never enough to saturate the 25.6GB/s memory bandwidth then it was somewhat deceptive to launch the IvyBridge product in that condition.

Also, given my limited understanding of the fastest DDR3 memory available right now is only capable of about 17.6GB/s(2133) it seems there would be no real-world gains between the IvyBridge 6 EUs and the Haswells 10 EUs. At least not until DDR4 memory becomes available.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Memory speed is only part of the performance.

Look at Richland vs Kaveri. If memory was the only factor there shouldnt have been any difference. Same applies for GT1, GT2 and GT3. I am sure 25GB/sec is more than plenty for everything with the GT1 versions you list. Even 40EUs is faster than 20EUs with that memory speed.

I assume you look on Pentiums, since Celerons doesnt support 1600Mhz.

 

[SPBHM]

dual channel DDR3 2133 is 34GB/s

this 25.6GB/s number comes from the fact the max memory supported by that CPU is dual channel DDR3 1600.

both the 10EU and 6EU are not heavily constrained by the memory bandwidth IMO.
GT2 with 1600 memory will have the same memory bandwidth and 2x the EUs still delivering a nice performance gain I would expect (haven't seen any real world test from haswell GT1)

 

[TheDarkKnight]

dual channel DDR3 2133 is 34GB/s

this 25.6GB/s number comes from the fact the max memory supported by that CPU is dual channel DDR3 1600.

both the 10EU and 6EU are not heavily constrained by the memory bandwidth IMO.
GT2 with 1600 memory will have the same memory bandwidth and 2x the EUs still delivering a nice performance gain I would expect (haven't seen any real world test from haswell GT1)

DDR3-2133(PC-17000) I was under the impression that the PC-17000 designation was the maximum theoretical bandwidth limit of the memory module it is being applied to. So since it's dual-channel I guess that means you are right, then.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Memory speed is only part of the performance.

Look at Richland vs Kaveri. If memory was the only factor there shouldnt have been any difference. Same applies for GT1, GT2 and GT3. I am sure 25GB/sec is more than plenty for everything with the GT1 versions you list. Even 40EUs is faster than 20EUs with that memory speed.

I assume you look on Pentiums, since Celerons doesnt support 1600Mhz.

Yes, I was looking at purchasing the Haswell G3220 chip. It looks like a pretty sweet deal, all things considered.

 

[el etro]

Intel's memory control technology is much ahead of AMD's. It reflects on their much less bandwidth-starved igp.

 

[Lonyo]

The HD 4000/4600 numbers are borrowed from my Iris Pro review using DDR3-2400, however I didn't notice scaling on Haswell GT2 beyond DDR3-1866.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/...ll-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600


http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/3

 

[DominionSeraph]

Why would you even care? If you're going to be gaming, get a dedicated card. If you're not, it doesn't matter.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Why would you even care? If you're going to be gaming, get a dedicated card. If you're not, it doesn't matter.

I think the days of a dedicated card being a "requirement" for gamers are quickly coming to an end.

So I must disagree with. It does matter. If the iGPU on Intel chips meets my requirements than there is no need for a dedicated gaming card.

For someone to come out on these forums and blindly spout that understanding the capabilities in, and the difference between, two different CPUs doesn't matter, is somewhat disturbing.

 

[zir_blazer]

Some people either doesn't have spare money to purchase a discrete Video Card, or don't want to. If the games they play run fluid enough with graphics at minimum, it can make a lot of users happy. This is true mostly for your typical office machines.

 

[Enigmoid]

You see 9% at best going from 1600 mhz to 2400 mhz on the igp on HD 4600.

 

[el etro]

Why would you even care? If you're going to be gaming, get a dedicated card. If you're not, it doesn't matter.

For gaming purposes only, there's no value in buy a sub $100 card.

You see 9% at best going from 1600 mhz to 2400 mhz on the igp on HD 4600.

Whoa! There's a lot of value in AMD's RAM!

 

[SiliconWars]

I have been spending a lot of time researching Intels "HD Graphics" so that I can make the best purchasing decision for my next CPU.

As others have said, Intel's IGP performance really isn't worth considering as a factor for your CPU. However....

A couple of things I have questions about are the relationships between the number of EUs(execution units) in each series of "HD Graphics" and the maximum memory bandwidth(GB/s) of the different generations of "HD Graphics" technologies.

So, the 7th generation of Intels "HD Graphics", which would have come with IyBridge CPUs had a ratio of 6 EUs/25.6 GB/s in memory bandwidth to Intels 7th generation of Haswell "HD Graphics" of 10EUs/25.6 GB/s in memory bandwidth.

To summarzie:
IvyBridge HD Graphics 6EU/25.6GB/s memory bandwidth
Haswell HD Graphics 10EU/25.6GB/s memory bandwidth

Which of these configurations is most evenly matched to each other. I am assuming that 6EUs were not enough to saturate the 25.6GB/s memory bandwidth of the IvyBridge HD Graphics so they boosted it up to 10 to utilize more of that bandwidth? OR...my second guess, is that the bandwidth was already capable of being saturated with only 6EUs and they boosted the number of EUs on the Haswell "HD Graphics" just to make it look better. Less likely scenario though. If the first is true, that 6 EUs was never enough to saturate the 25.6GB/s memory bandwidth then it was somewhat deceptive to launch the IvyBridge product in that condition.

Bandwidth is just another factor in performance of a GPU. It's actually the least important factor regarding performance in the majority of cases.

The EU's changed between Ivy Bridge and Haswell too so it's not even a simple case of making a comparison on that.

Also, given my limited understanding of the fastest DDR3 memory available right now is only capable of about 17.6GB/s(2133) it seems there would be no real-world gains between the IvyBridge 6 EUs and the Haswells 10 EUs. At least not until DDR4 memory becomes available.

You're overstating the importance of bandwidth on Intel IGP's. AMD can barely go forward because they are seriously constrained by bandwidth but Intel hasn't hit that wall yet, so the extra EU's on Haswell still scale favourably.

Edit - I suppose that answers your first question. Haswell is "more balanced" yes - but that doesn't mean Ivy Bridge was "deceptive" as you put it - it's not like having too much bandwidth is a bad thing in general - but a lack of bandwidth certainly can be.

 

[DominionSeraph]

I think the days of a dedicated card being a "requirement" for gamers are quickly coming to an end.

So I must disagree with. It does matter. If the iGPU on Intel chips meets my requirements than there is no need for a dedicated gaming card.

For someone to come out on these forums and blindly spout that understanding the capabilities in, and the difference between, two different CPUs doesn't matter, is somewhat disturbing.

The memory bandwidth question is moot. If your requirements are low enough that an Intel IGP will do, a few percent makes no difference.
You are trying to anchor a decision between CPUs based on the IGPs. If the graphics matter, get a discrete GPU.

For gaming purposes only, there's no value in buy a sub $100 card.

GTX 460's/5770s can be had well under $100 used. HD 4600 is 1/3rd the speed of a 6750 (5750). OP is talking about the 10 EU HD, which is going to be half of a HD 4600 at ~20% lower clocks.

 

[el etro]

GTX 460's/5770s can be had well under $100 used. HD 4600 is 1/3rd the speed of a 6750 (5750). OP is talking about the 10 EU HD, which is going to be half of a HD 4600 at ~20% lower clocks.

If op found a GTX460/5770 under $100, ok.

4600 still will no help so much in gaming compared to 4000. Newer games like Crysis 3 will not run well above 720p(low) on any of these Igps.

2-core processors is a bad deal for playing newer games no matter what processor is used.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I played around with an SLI configuration only one time -- surely it was great. But to me -- and for my needs -- it was unnecessary.

My gaming habits are a bit limp. I like flight and racing simulators.

For any new machine, I usually buy one good dGPU that is either a notch below top-end or two notches. I'm currently agonizing over the choices for my next build -- between spending $300 bucks and $600.

Now I'm considering prospects for using iGPU as independent of my NVidia card. And I only want to use it to drive my HTPC applications -- AVR/HDTV and my audio.

I could imagine a lot of people may just forego a dGPU when building a newer IB or Haswell. Depends on your gaming obsession, and may not depend as much on it.

 

[SiliconWars]

Seriously if you're not gonna put a discrete card in it just go with AMD - an A8-7600 or something. The Haswell IGP is just not good enough to play most titles and anything you'd want on an HTPC is better with AMD anyway. The only drawback is higher power consumption which is basically matched with the increased GPU performance.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-7850k-a8-7600-kaveri,3725-6.html

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Seriously if you're not gonna put a discrete card in it just go with AMD - an A8-7600 or something. The Haswell IGP is just not good enough to play most titles and anything you'd want on an HTPC is better with AMD anyway. The only drawback is higher power consumption which is basically matched with the increased GPU performance.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-7850k-a8-7600-kaveri,3725-6.html

Not wanting to start a dispute about this. I had turned over in my head the thought of jettisoning my Creative Labs X-Fi before I finally did it. I concluded that the quality of my surround sound was determined by my AVR and not the dGPU or even iGPU HDMI output.

How video quality compares, I'm not entirely sure. But HTPC requirements seem far below a high-end video card. Last I heard, you could build a decent HTPC with low end dGPUs. The only reason you'd want the high-end dGPU would be a coincidence between your HTPC needs and your gaming wants. My system's HTPC functions leave the CPU at EIST idle speed and voltage with at most 4% CPU usage. Gaming -- that's something else, I think.

 

[UaVaj]

I think the days of a dedicated card being a "requirement" for gamers are quickly coming to an end.

So I must disagree with. It does matter. If the iGPU on Intel chips meets my requirements than there is no need for a dedicated gaming card.

For someone to come out on these forums and blindly spout that understanding the capabilities in, and the difference between, two different CPUs doesn't matter, is somewhat disturbing.

stop worry about specs.

worry about output.

find reviews that showcase the game you want to play. given the game settings. simply see if such gpu is capable of delivering the min/average frame you desire.