Haswell will rival graphics performance of today's discrete cards!

[Nemesis 1]

Which discreet GPU will their new integrated GPU equal? A 6450? A 6970? How about a 3450 (still available on newegg)?

We'll see. Intel's credibility when it comes to GPU's is seriously lacking so forgive me if I'm a bit sceptical.

I an intel guy . Even tho Intel graphics IS NOT up to NV standards. The work Intel has done on their last 3 IGPs are impressive leaps from the last generation .

Haswell I really stay out of its graphics capabilities. Because like BD its a new concept and I really don't have anything what so ever to grab hold and use for flag waving.


If intel can improve haswell 7x better than SB . Than Intel has something . Haswell is a way off . Even tho speculation on BD was way to early . No need to speculate on Haswell so early . As IB is yet arrived.

If Intel expects 7x improvement by time haswell is created or fabbed . That leaves me more interested in IB IGP If intel can at least double IB IGP performance . THan Haswell becomes even more important. As for Haswell compute I really don't care . These SB are so fast its just doesn't matter.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The more I read this, the more I think you must be kidding, right? The inevitable melding of the traditional CPU and GPU is hardly akin to a very minor architectural tweak. Taking the best aspects of the CPU and GPU and combining them into a heterogeneous core is one of the most exciting things to come along since we've been using home computers. There are so many possibilities affording by doing this, a chip that seamlessly utilizes the strengths of a CPU and GPU for whatever workload you toss at it is fantastic, very much looking forward to this.

I won't debate ya on this .But IDC has payed attention to what intel has done and what it wants todo . With each generation intels vision of future becomes more clear . Intels has doubled the last 3 generations of IGP ++++.

You guys look at intels 16 EUs that are suppose to appear on IB and right away its only a 33% improvement when the last generation blows that thinking right out of the water . Also 16 EU IB is likely the baby. HD2000 HD3000.

As for Larrebee Ya take your shots . Intel earned them . BUT Nights corner is real and its coming . Don't pass it off so quickly . Intels plans and AVX2 revealed some interestinf information that look directly at graphics. IB graphics will be really good . But still not exceptable to me as a gamer . Sure its better than llano but big deal LLANO is nothing special. If haswell increases graphics and compute perfprmance by 7x over SB . THATS GOOD ENOUGH.

 

[Jionix]

And yet it doesn't matter, because anyone who is going to play any type of 3D game on their PC is not going to be happy with Llano's performance. People who have always used IGP's (only) in the past don't play PC games and giving them better baseline performance isn't going to change that.

Wrong. Again, it seems that as soon as Llano hit the street, the goal posts were moved, or some people decide to ignore the real world.

Do you know how many people play The Sims and World of Warcraft on old Dell machines with Pentium 4's and the garbage GMA IGP? These games are pretty old, granted, but which IGP plays them better, HD 3000 or Llano?

There is also a lot of cases where Llano could be classed as being infinitely better than HD 3000. Gaming at 1280, Llano provides more instances of playable framerates than it doesn't. The HD 3000? It sucks. Plus, Llano actually renders games the way they are supposed to be.

Consider this, even if you increase the performance of HD 3000 three fold on the next release, it'll still suck, because it has terrible drivers. Right now, Intel has an advantage because most reviewers do not, or will not, delve into visual quality of IGPs when they cover their performance. I believe that, with correct rendering, Intel IGPs would slide at least 20% on performance. "Shit-rendering Bump".

Anyway, back to my original point and people who play 3D games on old or lacking machines. If Dell is offering an i3 and Llano systems, which system would they be better off with? Price is the big issue, and Dell charges a premium on system upgrades, so if the average buyer didn't bother with a discrete card on their last purchase, they probably aren't going to on the next purchase. Obviously, the choice is going to be Llano, because all the extra CPU power Intel offers means nothing for the average user who is most certainly NOT encrypting or compressing RARs, or crunching prime numbers. For the average users Llano is absolutely the best of all worlds --- quad core CPU with enough graphics capabilities for TRUE casual gaming. Intel only offers a fast CPU to match with a discrete card.

Of course, we can argue on which would be a better buy for this type of user all we want, as the fact of the matter is, they would buy Intel no matter what, and would most likely be satisfied with the marginal performance of it's IGP.

 

[ieatdonuts]

Basically your entire post can be summed up with Llano has better graphics. It doesn't counter his correct assertion that the differences between Llano and Sandy Bridge are irrelevant for the vast majority of consumers and even for the small demographic that would be better off with Llano, they probably aren't educated enough to choose AMD over a brand that's favored by the OEMs.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I find your post very short sighted.

AS do I , The differance is your ability to look ahead is clouded by brand name . I am an Intel guy period . I use intels SB IGP along with an NV560 Ti. Its fast and I actually like it better than the 2600K with the NV 580. But that because my 2500k is goofy. I believe I got broken bios. That I really really like.

Your statements about Intels IGP are infact inflamatory based on what intel has accomplished in its last 3 generations . and the fourth generation is in the wild now.

Your pretty right on about what ya say about larrabbee. But that comes right back to short sighted ness again. Nights corner is real. AVX 2 looks very interesting and it looks like intel will have its own sli. on haswell. Maybe on IB as intel has said there are AVX improvements on IB AVX. What those improvements are is yet revealed to the general public.

 

[jvroig]

It doesn't counter his correct assertion that the differences between Llano and Sandy Bridge are irrelevant for the vast majority of consumers and even for the small demographic that would be better off with Llano, they probably aren't educated enough to choose AMD over a brand that's favored by the OEMs.

But their debate isn't about whether the consumers are educated enough to recognize Llano, or if it can get through to OEMs.

The debate was whether Llano actually had any use or was worth anything, based on the incorrect assumption that "anyone who is going to play any type of 3D game on their PC is not going to be happy with Llano's performance."

Like jionix, I maintain that Llano in fact shows obvious, significant worth - by finally giving people playable experiences at low res. As I said a few posts up:

It's hard to state absolutes, because none of us know everybody in the supposed target audience.

[snip]

... Not everybody needs/wants to play on hi-res, max settings, 16xAA and AF.

[snip]

... That Llano has now made games playable at low-res means people like my friend can now rely on "IGPs" for their needs and not bother with a discrete card.

Since he plays games just as often as you and me (every night, far as I know), and plays the same types of games (L4D2, looking forward to Diablo 3, etc), would you exclude him from the "gamer" definition just because he is satisfied with low-res?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Yeah, SB can also make you earn $173/hr with Google at home and nail hot chicks. Type legibly before you even attempt to troll. Shoo.

I am not trolling . If any people are trolling here its the people saying llano is great . It an out and out lie . It is not a gamer chip period . Its barely OK for casual gaming. Your trying to market for AMD . Your pushing a product that comes up short in graphics and is pittyful in compute.

This is a CPU also . Your peoples talk is almost shameful. Buy AMD discrete and Xfire . The bottom end of the market for me is boring. I don't rven look at the junk . Its for low income want to bees.

Re: "Your trying to market for AMD . Your pushing a product that comes up short in graphics and is pittyful in compute."

We can't have that kind of post here (accusatory and inflammatory). Such accusatory posts (especially about shilling / marketing / fanboyism) only leads to further fanboy wars and thread derailment. Please avoid doing so in the future.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Cerb]

I am not trolling . If any people are trolling here its the people saying llano is great . It an out and out lie . It is not a gamer chip period . Its barely OK for casual gaming. Your trying to market for AMD . Your pushing a product that comes up short in graphics and is pittyful in compute.

Short in graphics compared to...ION 2 (you can still buy PCs with nVidia 92/3/400 GPUs)? HD 3000? Please.

This is a CPU also . Your peoples talk is almost shameful. Buy AMD discrete and Xfire . The bottom end of the market for me is boring. I don't rven look at the junk . Its for low income want to bees.

Boring or not, it's a big deal, and discrete, much less crossfire, are commonly not even available options. Intel's advantage in CPU power in this realm doesn't matter too much.

 

[Arkadrel]

I am not trolling . If any people are trolling here its the people saying llano is great . It an out and out lie . It is not a gamer chip period . Its barely OK for casual gaming. Your trying to market for AMD . Your pushing a product that comes up short in graphics and is pittyful in compute.

This is a CPU also . Your peoples talk is almost shameful. Buy AMD discrete and Xfire . The bottom end of the market for me is boring. I don't rven look at the junk . Its for low income want to bees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lth_M25cXjE

Llano @3.6ghz (2.9ghz->3.6ghz) FSB133->140, iGPU 600mhz->840mhz.

3Dmark Vantage score ~6200 points.
Its playing Crysis2 ~40-45 fps.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaWx3gskvAE&feature=related

Llano @2.9ghz

playing Lost Planet 2 @1680x1050 medium settings ~ 27fps



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoq-RBOOQc0&feature=related

Aion: (both running same settings, both stock)
Llano 3850 vs i3-2100
Llano ~26fps vs i3-2100 ~8fps



The matter of the fact is, with a Llano you can have enjoyable gameing experiance with the iGPU. Even with newer gameing titles, as long as your okay playing 1280x1024 resolution and medium settings.


That said... I too wish it had abit more punch....sadly to do that, they would probably need quad channel system ram, and that seems like something AMD isnt willing to do.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Short in graphics compared to...ION 2 (you can still buy PCs with nVidia 92/3/400 GPUs)? HD 3000? Please.

Boring or not, it's a big deal, and discrete, much less crossfire, are commonly not even available options. Intel's advantage in CPU power in this realm doesn't matter too much.

Than thats how it should be marketed. If you want an informed public , Great . But as your pushing APU make sure ya let the public know about its compute power which just sucks . No other word fits it better than sucks,

 

[Nemesis 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lth_M25cXjE

Llano @3.6ghz (2.9ghz->3.6ghz) FSB133->140, iGPU 600mhz->840mhz.

3Dmark Vantage score ~6200 points.
Its playing Crysis2 ~40-45 fps.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaWx3gskvAE&feature=related

Llano @2.9ghz

playing Lost Planet 2 @1680x1050 medium settings ~ 27fps



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoq-RBOOQc0&feature=related

Aion: (both running same settings, both stock)
Llano 3850 vs i3-2100
Llano ~26fps vs i3-2100 ~8fps



The matter of the fact is, with a Llano you can have enjoyable gameing experiance with the iGPU. Even with newer gameing titles, as long as your okay playing 1280x1024 resolution and medium settings.


That said... I too wish it had abit more punch....sadly to do that, they would probably need quad channel system ram, and that seems like something AMD isnt willing to do.

Your wasting your words on me . I have read the video section here for years . I know what all you people have said in the past . So stop tring to fool someone who knows these posters. ondie graphics right now suck . to claim anything else is dishonest .

 

[wirednuts]

Your wasting your words on me . I have read the video section here for years . I know what all you people have said in the past . So stop tring to fool someone who knows these posters. ondie graphics right now suck . to claim anything else is dishonest .

sort of sucks for gaming... awesome for everything else like home theater use

 

[Arkaign]

sort of sucks for gaming... awesome for everything else like home theater use

This is true.

Llano shows promise, if the next-gen on-die GPU product can get passable framerates at 1920x1080 in common games (WoW, SC2, Diablo 3, Skyrim, etc, thinking of 2012+), then it'll be ready to jump from the realm of HTPC/notebook duty to legitimate budget gaming platform.

To anyone suggesting playing titles at 1280x1024/etc, one must realize that 1080p displays are $100 and less now, and quite usually going to non-native resolutions makes the video quality look absolutely terrible, even more so if the aspect ratio is wrong.

 

[ieatdonuts]

If you're talking about the desktop llano, maybe - but in my mind the desktop llano is kind of irrelevant.

The mobile llano is what really matters - and right now it's OK. It works at 768p (the typical notebook resolution) but framerates need to be 30+ and it needs to be able to do at least medium details. And - it has at least come somewhat near Sandy Bridge in CPU performance.

Trinity could be a solid product.

 

[n0x1ous]

But their debate isn't about whether the consumers are educated enough to recognize Llano, or if it can get through to OEMs.

The debate was whether Llano actually had any use or was worth anything, based on the incorrect assumption that "anyone who is going to play any type of 3D game on their PC is not going to be happy with Llano's performance."

Like jionix, I maintain that Llano in fact shows obvious, significant worth - by finally giving people playable experiences at low res. As I said a few posts up:

you can get playable low rez frame rates on HD 3000 as well. Runs Quake Live and others fine at low settings. not as good as Llano, but for the type of people that play low end games on the PC, they are more casual players and added CPU performance which can be felt in all other aspects of using the PC has "more" pluses to it than Llano's one check mark feature of better graphics

Also, these types of users are uneducated about hardware and therefore Intel will be the choice anyway as they are what most Best Buys etc are pushing

 

[Nemesis 1]

If you're talking about the desktop llano, maybe - but in my mind the desktop llano is kind of irrelevant.

The mobile llano is what really matters - and right now it's OK. It works at 768p (the typical notebook resolution) but framerates need to be 30+ and it needs to be able to do at least medium details. And - it has at least come somewhat near Sandy Bridge in CPU performance.

Trinity could be a solid product.

The problem with your statement is its based on lowend Sb, dollar for dollar comparison . The review sites aren't really doing Cpu benchmarks since LLano came out , There has been a few good reviews . But AMD is getting alot of help from the reviews site with this dollar for dollar type reviews . LLANO doesn't come close to compute performance on the mobile unit only on dollar for dollar compares.

I have been accused of trolling this thread . So I went and looked at the topic name several times . Its not I thats trolling . I made a marketing statement . Got points for it . Whats llano doing in an intel thread. If it was a IB topic I could see it . But a Haswell topic there is zero room for llano in this topic as llano is nothing close to what haswell will bring . I can't make wagers on IB graphics as it would be cheating.

I haven't really seen any sites do a really good review of LLANO cpu / Were we use graphics cards . On both SB and llano at high res. with topend cards . That would show the whole truth.
LlANO cpu is weak and it really shows once ya load it up with highend graphics.

So thats enough about llano in a haswell topic

 

[Nintendesert]

But a Haswell topic there is zero room for llano in this topic as llano is nothing close to what haswell will bring .

I would hope a 2013 product can exceed what a 2011 one brings.

 

[ieatdonuts]

Anyways I wanted to bump my question from the other page - is it possible that Haswell is fully homogenous?

I.e. software rendering for everything

 

[Cerb]

Than thats how it should be marketed. If you want an informed public , Great . But as your pushing APU make sure ya let the public know about its compute power which just sucks . No other word fits it better than sucks,

I'm sure everybody who might look at a Versa is worried about it's towing ability, too.

I don't want one for my uses, either, but that doesn't mean it's not good for others, who have lesser performance needs and wants.

 

[Jionix]

But a Haswell topic there is zero room for llano in this topic as llano is nothing close to what haswell will bring

And Haswell will be nothing close to what AMD will have available (assuming AMD is still around).

Intel, in terms of graphics, is still at least 3 generations behind AMD. Intel still barely renders DX9, let alone DX10, and obviously no DX11. All the execution units in the world won't change that fact. And until Intel has correct rendering, filtering, anti-aliasing, they could be twice as fast as AMD in graphics and it doesn't mean anything.

 

[jvroig]

you can get playable low rez frame rates on HD 3000 as well. Runs Quake Live and others fine at low settings.

From Anandtech's review, I would have to disagree with you: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/5. It depends on what games you wish to play, and on quite a lot of them, Llano is playable, HD3000 is not. But this isn't really THE source of our disagreement, because I am sure you've already seen that review.

Where we really differ on opinion is this, the root of why we disagree:

but for the type of people that play low end games on the PC, they are more casual players and added CPU performance which can be felt in all other aspects of using the PC has "more" pluses to it than Llano's one check mark feature of better graphics

Your argument is still based on an assumption about the target audience, and this assumption is unsubstantiated (and the both of us would have a hard time proving that assumption). You are assuming that anybody who is not obsessed with hi-res, max settings, full AF/AA are "more casual players" and assume they would not be playing modern games like those in the AT review I linked to above. Just from a few friends I have, I know that assumption is simply not true. At any rate, since I am not the one making the assumption, I have nothing to prove.

And that's where we differ. Like in my first response to you, we simply have no data that proves that, so we can't make that assumption. And that definition of a "gamer" is a rather narrow one. You mean to say that the friend I mentioned in my response to you is not a hardcore gamer (even though he plays the same modern games as us, and just as frequently) simply because he gets along fine with 1024x768 or 1366x768?

Before I got out of college, I also did not bother with max settings or hi-res - in fact, I remember having to play Morrowind on 800x600 back in 2003, because that was the only way to get acceptable performance using our low-powered PC. Now, I play everything maxed out as much as possible. Does that mean I suddenly became a "hardcore gamer" only when I started having money of my own? I was a hardcore gamer long before I had money to waste on a gaming PC - I was in PC gaming since the XT processor when I started playing the original Prince of Persia and Steel Thunder (a tank simulation) on floppy disks.

That's really the meat of our difference of opinion. You assume that people who are satisfied with low-res and non-maxed-out settings are just casual gamers and are interested only in older/low-end games, I am not making any assumptions. And without such an assumption, you can see why Llano is a good enough product.

Also, these types of users are uneducated about hardware and therefore Intel will be the choice anyway as they are what most Best Buys etc are pushing

Irrelevant to the discussion of Llano's worth/value as a product. This is up to the OEMs to decide. This affects Llano's effect to AMD's bottomline, not Llano's value to its target market (end-user / consumer effect). Let's not mix the two issues up and focus our debate on Llano's value to end users. I would rather talk about how a product affects us, than how a product would affect the company's bottomline.

I am not asking you to stop posting about it I wouldn't want you to confuse what I am saying with that. I simply have no interest in talking about it, so I am not likely to respond to such topics further, but you are completely free to do so, as others here may want to talk about it.

Cheers.

 

[Nemesis 1]

And Haswell will be nothing close to what AMD will have available (assuming AMD is still around).

Intel, in terms of graphics, is still at least 3 generations behind AMD. Intel still barely renders DX9, let alone DX10, and obviously no DX11. All the execution units in the world won't change that fact. And until Intel has correct rendering, filtering, anti-aliasing, they could be twice as fast as AMD in graphics and it doesn't mean anything.

Being It been officially made a llano thread. I will assume were talking Ondie grapgics here. With that said . AMD isn't anywere near 3 generations Ahead. Read ATs review of SB graphics . He doesn't over praise it. But He does say its the first IGP ever that you can play many games at at reasonable frame rates at lower RES. AMD had nothing that could match it till llano came out . So please tell were AMD is three generations ahead. IF your talking discrete . INtel hasn't got a product . But for about 12 billion they could have one dam quik. That would be the dumbest thinf intel could ever do . Intel may buy Imagination tech tho . As they own 25% of the company now and apple owns 15%.

Intel IGP are based on there tech . In the cell phone market They are NO.1 Not sure how their doing in the tablet sector . This is a sector intel want to get into bigtime . I suspect game companies will Start coding for these lower power units . SO three years from now . Who knows how this market will turn . But IF ARM is a Threat . SO is imagination tech . As not even NV can match up with them and thats saying a mouthful.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Being It been officially made a llano thread. I will assume were talking Ondie grapgics here. With that said . AMD isn't anywere near 3 generations Ahead. Read ATs review of SB graphics . He doesn't over praise it. But He does say its the first IGP ever that you can play many games at at reasonable frame rates at lower RES. AMD had nothing that could match it till llano came out . So please tell were AMD is three generations ahead. IF your talking discrete . INtel hasn't got a product . But for about 12 billion they could have one dam quik. That would be the dumbest thinf intel could ever do . Intel may buy Imagination tech tho . As they own 25% of the company now and apple owns 15%.

Intel IGP are based on there tech . In the cell phone market They are NO.1 Not sure how their doing in the tablet sector . This is a sector intel want to get into bigtime . I suspect game companies will Start coding for these lower power units . SO three years from now . Who knows how this market will turn . But IF ARM is a Threat . SO is imagination tech . As not even NV can match up with them and thats saying a mouthful.

What a train wreck of a post.

And yes, AMD and Nvidia are at least 3 generations ahead of Intel in graphics, that is being kind to Intel.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Anyways I wanted to bump my question from the other page - is it possible that Haswell is fully homogenous?

I.e. software rendering for everything

It does appear to be that way . But so little info on haswell . But from what I read on the AVX 2 it appears to be . I am not sure what happened here. CL was interesting news. and apple wanting it has really thrown me off. I really don't believe it was apple that wanted it at all. But intel . It really is kinda crazy to look at CL and and how intel compilers work with C C++ . CL is a perfect fit for intel . were my thoughts when I heard the news . Why would apple want open CL . Didn't make sense . Than when Intel announced AVX THat really tied it all together for me . Other than Intel had to let AMD in . Than when I started researching AVX abit . I discoveded Even tho AVX was intels New instruction set And AMD could use it . I thought why would intel do this on a x86 processor . When they can morph X86. Just as AMD can and just as NV can . THan I found the ans . EVEN tho amd can use the instruction set FOR AVX . The PRE FIX of VEX is an INTEL EXCLUSIVE ... I also discovered at the same time what happened to Intels Mitosis project . PRE FIX of VEX.

THan you throw larrabee instruction set into the mix . It really really looks interesting .

This is a bit early to discuss haswell . BUT the BD hype actually started way earlier and its still not out. When did BD hype start After PH I failed?

 

[Nemesis 1]

What a train wreck of a post.

And yes, AMD and Nvidia are at least 3 generations ahead of Intel in graphics, that is being kind to Intel.

Are talking discrete . Because if your not your trolling . SB had the best IGP ever till LLANO came out . This is not a discussion about Discrete graphics . and don't pretend ypu don't understand that . You are using red herring. That put intel 1/2 generation behind they had the lead earlier this year. Thats really 1/2 a generation as IB will be out . UNless trinity comes out befor Ivy. I never comparred Intel discrete to NV amd because Intel has no discrete. Hell I should start on how NV has nothing to compare with AMD intel CPUs.

This is a haswell thread . IGP are in . But discrete is out. Lets bring IBMs latest release in to the thread.

Are you going to insist AMD is 3 generations ahead of Intel on IGPs . Funny because In jan of 2011 that wasn't the case . Intel was the Leader. THATS a FACT . I got points taken in this topic. You going to say Intel didn't have the Best IGP ever in january of 2011?

You should have to back it up with proof . SHOW your proof.