Iris Graphics. Execution doesn't meet the vision.

[ez2l3rn]

Am I the only one that was looking forward to better integrated graphics as part of the Haswell release this year?
Am I the only one that thought hey maybe casual gaming on an ultrabook is becoming a reality finally?

Haswell performance benchmarks proved that integrated graphics really could be viable.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/16

I was really looking forward to Haswell more for its integrated graphics HD5000 and less so for the battery life. For all of the articles that talked about how great the graphics were I am finding very few actual ultrabooks are using the higher end graphics. Out of last generation's hot ultrabook models, Apple is the only one refreshing with the HD5000:
Apple Macbook Air - HD5000
Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro - HD4400
Lenovo X1 Carbon - Not released with Haswell yet
Samsung ATIV 9 - HD4400
Acer S7 - HD4400
Sony Vaio Duo 13 - HD4400 (w/ configurable TDP)
Asus UX301 LA - Iris HD5100 (Not released yet)


Really? What the heck is going on? It doesn't look like Intel and the PC OEMs are getting along too well on this ultrabook vision. Before anyone flames that no one games on an ultrabook, thin and light is the future. If you could you would.

 

[NTMBK]

It's all about the price tag.

 

[Essence_of_War]

I think that there is also reason to believe that part of Intel and Apple's ongoing partnership gets apple exclusive (or at least first dibs!) on some of the highest-end ULV chips.

I suspect that what you're seeing in the non-apple mobile market is either lack of access, or higher cost for access, to the high end ULV chips for non-apple OEMs.

Basically, my suspicion is that Lenovo/Samsung/Acer would be using the Iris chips IF they could get them at a reasonable price.

 

[Talaii]

Firstoff - HD 5000 isn't iris, and it's a long way short of HD 5200/Iris pro. It's barely faster than HD 4400 in the 15W ultrabook chips - works out to be about 11% overall, not surprising that other manufacturers are wary of spending the extra $65 (price difference between the 4200u/4250u, according to ark.intel.com). It's actually slower than the 4600 in a the higher-powered parts; more power headroom makes a bigger difference than the extra shader cores. Having said that, I've found the HD 4400 in my Surface Pro 2 to be much more bearable than an older laptop with HD 4000 (i5 3317U) - though how much is from better drivers and how much from the newer hardware is hard to say.

There may also be supply issues due to Apple - whether that's likely is another matter, but I doubt we'd see a lot of notebooks with it either way.

As for the Iris parts - it looks like the HD 5100/Iris CPUs are starting to appear - but are only very slightly faster than the HD 5000 for graphics. This may be an indication that memory bandwidth is a major limitation. Still waiting for more numbers on them - hopefully there'll be a review for the new 13" Retina Macbook pro here soon. Iris Pro/HD 5200 is a big jump up - but is also only available on 47W quad-core chips, with a price premium; so it's not too surprising that a lot of manufacturers are instead using a quad-core (sometimes 37W, sometimes 47W) with a discrete GPU instead.

Iris Pro is available on a System76 laptop (not sure which OEM they use) and the new 15" Retina Macbook Pro, and has been shipping for a bit. But it's never going to be in really thin-and-light laptops because of the 47W power draw. Meaning it won't be in (almost) any ultrabooks - though it's kind of amazing how much power they cram into a thin chassis on laptops like the Macbook Pro and the Dell XPS 15.

 

[Enigmoid]

Am I the only one that was looking forward to better integrated graphics as part of the Haswell release this year?
Am I the only one that thought hey maybe casual gaming on an ultrabook is becoming a reality finally?

Haswell performance benchmarks proved that integrated graphics really could be viable.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/16

I was really looking forward to Haswell more for its integrated graphics HD5000 and less so for the battery life. For all of the articles that talked about how great the graphics were I am finding very few actual ultrabooks are using the higher end graphics. Out of last generation's hot ultrabook models, Apple is the only one refreshing with the HD5000:
Apple Macbook Air - HD5000 (Iris)
Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro - HD4400
Lenovo X1 Carbon - Not released with Haswell yet
Samsung ATIV 9 - HD4400
Acer S7 - HD4400


Really? What the heck is going on? It doesn't look like Intel and the PC OEMs are getting along too well on this ultrabook vision. Before anyone flames that no one games on an ultrabook, thin and light is the future. If you could you would.

Iris 5000 is too thermally limited to be practical in a 15W SKU. Even Iris 500 is barely faster than a full fat HD 4000.

 

[ez2l3rn]

To the points above. Yes my mistake about the HD5000 being labeled as Iris.

A supply/exclusivity issue makes more sense for the argument around HD5000 adoption. Agreed that the power draw of the 5100 and 5200 make it unrealistic to see in many ultra books.

I read that it was because of Apple's influence over Intel that the Haswell roadmap focused on graphics and battery life. The PC OEMs likely would have just wanted more of the same. Actually this whole ultrabook concept really started with Apple anyway so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised.

I'm still waiting for the day I can casually game on an ultrabook. Being on travel all the time now makes this really high up on the want list.

 

[ez2l3rn]

Iris 5000 is too thermally limited to be practical in a 15W SKU. Even Iris 500 is barely faster than a full fat HD 4000.

No. Benchmarks show the integrated HD 5000 beats HD 4000 pretty handily in some cases.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7072/intel-hd-5000-vs-hd-4000-vs-hd-4400

 

[Enigmoid]

No. Benchmarks show the integrated HD 5000 beats HD 4000 pretty handily in some cases.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7072/intel-hd-5000-vs-hd-4000-vs-hd-4400

I meant 'full fat' as in non power limited HD 4000 SKUs. Not ULV. Also From the review,

The data ranges from a meager 2.3% advantage over Ivy Bridge ULV to as much as 40.8%. On average, Intel's HD 5000 offered a 15.3% performance advantage over Intel's HD 4000 graphics.

The HD 4000 in a mobile 35W dual or 45W quad is more than 15% faster than ULV HD 4000.

 

[IntelUser2000]

I agree. The whole graphics lineup is not executed. But its not just the manufacturers. Apple can justify using the high end iGPUs like Iris because they have rather high volumes for such high end devices. Iris 5100 supporting Asus Ultrabook costs $1800+!!

Intel did not price the price of Iris-enabled parts right. The HD 4200/4400/5000 are pretty decent with manufacturer volume discounts and such but Notebook prices for the Iris 5100 and Iris Pro 5200 show that its not cheaper at all to the discrete competition. I mean, how many are willing to buy a GT 640M performance in a $1000 Notebook with weight and thickness that significantly overlap GT 650M enabled parts and battery that's not that much better? What about a $1800 device with GT 720M performance?

I am pretty sure that the die size/performance ratio isn't right for the high end parts. This isn't something that will be done better until at least Broadwell.

Apple Macbook Air - HD5000
Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro - HD4400
Lenovo X1 Carbon - Not released with Haswell yet
Samsung ATIV 9 - HD4400
Acer S7 - HD4400

Please add the Sony Vaio Duo 13.

The Vaio Duo 13 has a special advantage over others in that it uses Configurable TDP to offer HD 5000 performance for its HD 4400. And you have an option for HD 5000 too.

 

[PinchedNerve]

I just bought a new LT with Iris Pro 5200. I love it.

Laptop - Clevo W740SU - Intel Core i7 4750 HQ with integrated intel iris Pro 5200 GFX | 120 GB intel 525 series MSSD | 1 TB Travelstar 7200 RPM HDD | 16 Gigs Mem | Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7260HMW 802.11AC | Win 8.1 Pro with Media Center.

I built & bought it here, http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/system/Zeus_Hercules_Gaming_Notebook

Total price was $1,354.00.

Anyone interested can read a review of the Clevo W740SU here, http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Schenker-S413-Clevo-W740SU-Notebook.98313.0.html

 

[ez2l3rn]

Please add the Sony Vaio Duo 13.

The Vaio Duo 13 has a special advantage over others in that it uses Configurable TDP to offer HD 5000 performance for its HD 4400. And you have an option for HD 5000 too.

Added and also added the Asus UX301 with Iris 5100 graphics.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Asus-Zenbook-Infinity-UX301LA-Ultrabook.103027.0.html

Unfortunately the graphics perf isn't anything to write home about. It looks like power is a huge issue and the R&D + marketing did a cost/benefit analysis and basically decided to look away from integrated graphics. I know the kinds of discussions that happen in those meetings since I used to work at a major OEM .

I just bought a new LT with Iris Pro 5200. I love it.

Laptop - Clevo W740SU - Intel Core i7 4750 HQ with integrated intel iris Pro 5200 GFX | 120 GB intel 525 series MSSD | 1 TB Travelstar 7200 RPM HDD | 16 Gigs Mem | Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7260HMW 802.11AC | Win 8.1 Pro with Media Center.

Appreciate you sharing that, but integrated graphics is about squeezing a powerful package into a small form factor. I should say powerful "enough". That Clevo doesn't exactly fit into the ultrabook category.

 

[Fox5]

It seems that the Iris Pro 5200 competes against the Geforce 740M and 750M in the same price and power usage bracket.

Except it can't beat the 740M, and it's way behind the 750M. Intel isn't quite there yet apparently.

 

[PinchedNerve]

You already listed the GFX so I won't bother.

Apple Macbook Air - Top Base Model - 4GB mem, dual core i5, 256 GB SSD, wireless 802.11ac, OS OSx Mavericks, weight 2.95 lbs, price $1,299.00.

Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro - Top Base Model - 8 GB mem, Core i7-4500U, 256 GB SSD, wireless 802.11n, OS Win8.1, weight 3.06 lbs, price $1,149.00.

Lenovo X1 Carbon - Top Base Model - 8 GB mem, Core i5-3427U, 128 GB SSD, wireless 802.11n, OS Win7 or 8 Pro, weight 2.99 lbs, price $1,486.65.

Samsung ATIV 9 - Top Base Model - 4 GB mem, Core i5-4200U, 128 GB SSD, wireless 802.11n, OS Win 8, weight 3.06 lbs, price $1,399.99.

Acer S7 - Top Base Model - 8 GB mem, Core i5-4200U, 128 GB SSD, wireless 802.11n, OS Win8, weight 2.87 lbs, price $1,449.99.

Sony Vaio Duo 13 - Top Base Model - 8 GB mem, Core i7-4650U, 512 GB SSD, wireless 802.11n, OS Win8 Pro, weight 2.93 lbs, price $1,449.99.

Asus UX301 LA - Top Base Model - 8 GB mem, Core i7-4558U, 2 x 256GB SSD in RAID 0, wireless 802.11ac, OS Win8 Pro, weight 2.6 lbs, price $2,199.00.

Clevo W740SU - Top Base Model - 8 GB mem, Core i7-4750HQ, 1 TB 7200 HDD, wireless 802.11n, OS Win8.1, weight 4.1 lbs, price $1,039.00.

Clevo W740SU - My Config - 16 GB mem, Core i7-4750HQ, 120 GB SSD and 1 TB 7200 HDD, wireless 802.11ac, OS Win8.1 Pro, weight 4.1 lbs, price $1,354.00.

I'll take 1 lbs extra (average) every day for superior specs & lower cost. Upgrade any one of your listed choices to match mine (I don't think all will allow 2 storage drives) & see what the price is for an average 1 pound lighter.

 

[Fox5]

I'll take 1 lbs extra (average) every day for superior specs & lower cost. Upgrade any one of your listed choices to match mine (I don't think all will allow 2 storage drives) & see what the price is for an average 1 pound lighter.

Let's call it what it is. >33% heavier. In a completely different class of notebook. On the lighter end of mainstream normal sized laptops.

Compare it to the Clevo W230ST
http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/system/Xplorer_X3-9100_Gaming_Notebook

With the same specs as you listed, it's $1404 minus a $50 rebate, so basically the same price as your laptop.

Clevo W230St - 16GB, Core i7-4700mq, 120GB SSD, 1TB 7200RPM hdd, wireless 802.11 ac, Win8.1 pro, 1080p screen, 4.6lbs

Only a half pound heavier and yet significantly faster graphics.

Or for about a pound heavier than your laptop, you could have gotten the much cheaper and faster (geforce gt755m) Lenovo Y410p starting at $750.

At a similar price to your laptop, you could have also gotten the MSI GE40 with Geforce GTX 760M, coming in at 4.4lbs. And that's a full on "gamers" notebook, coming in at around the same weight as the Clevo W740SU.

If you just wanted the most premium, thin designs around, Asus Zenbook Prime, Sony Vaio Pro, and Macbook Air have the Clevo beat. And they all offer 5-10+ hours of battery life.
If you wanted the most premium design while still having some gaming power, the new Dell XPS 15, Macbook Pro 15", and Razer Blade Pro all have the Clevo beat at similar weights, albeit costing around $2k each. ($1500 starting price on the Dell XPS15 I think, around $2k with all upgrades) And they offer 10 hour battery life instead of the 4 hours of the Clevo W740SU.

 

[PinchedNerve]

Let's call it what it is. >33% heavier. In a completely different class of notebook. On the lighter end of mainstream normal sized laptops.

Compare it to the Clevo W230ST
http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/system/Xplorer_X3-9100_Gaming_Notebook

With the same specs as you listed, it's $1404 minus a $50 rebate, so basically the same price as your laptop.

Clevo W230St - 16GB, Core i7-4700mq, 120GB SSD, 1TB 7200RPM hdd, wireless 802.11 ac, Win8.1 pro, 1080p screen, 4.6lbs

Only a half pound heavier and yet significantly faster graphics.

Or for about a pound heavier than your laptop, you could have gotten the much cheaper and faster (geforce gt755m) Lenovo Y410p starting at $750.

At a similar price to your laptop, you could have also gotten the MSI GE40 with Geforce GTX 760M, coming in at 4.4lbs. And that's a full on "gamers" notebook, coming in at around the same weight as the Clevo W740SU.

If you just wanted the most premium, thin designs around, Asus Zenbook Prime, Sony Vaio Pro, and Macbook Air have the Clevo beat. And they all offer 5-10+ hours of battery life.
If you wanted the most premium design while still having some gaming power, the new Dell XPS 15, Macbook Pro 15", and Razer Blade Pro all have the Clevo beat at similar weights, albeit costing around $2k each. ($1500 starting price on the Dell XPS15 I think, around $2k with all upgrades) And they offer 10 hour battery life instead of the 4 hours of the Clevo W740SU.

Read the review of the Clevo W230ST & you may be able to figure out some of the reasons why I didn't buy it. It was actually on my finalist list. http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-One-K33-3E-Clevo-W230ST-Barebones-Notebook.99914.0.html

Edit: Also the OP posted specifically about "Iris Graphics" and I believe none of your options have it. I am not aware of another LT or UB with "Iris Graphics" in a smaller lighter package then the Clevo W740SU. Likely there is, but I'm not aware of it. Lastly, I think we can agree that those "most premium, thin designs around" are getting a good bit of their battery life with lower end CPU & graphics among other concessions, ie not Iris graphics.

 

[Fox5]

Read the review of the Clevo W230ST & you may be able to figure out some of the reasons why I didn't buy it. It was actually on my finalist list. http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-One-K33-3E-Clevo-W230ST-Barebones-Notebook.99914.0.html

Edit: Also the OP posted specifically about "Iris Graphics" and I believe none of your options have it. I am not aware of another LT or UB with "Iris Graphics" in a smaller lighter package then the Clevo W740SU. Likely there is, but I'm not aware of it. Lastly, I think we can agree that those "most premium, thin designs around" are getting a good bit of their battery life with lower end CPU & graphics among other concessions, ie not Iris graphics.

My point was that Iris Pro isn't getting design wins because it doesn't seem to bring any actual advantages over going with an Intel cpu + discrete gpu. There's only a handful of laptops with Iris Pro, the W740SU and the Macbook Pros (of which the 15" includes the barely faster 750m for some reason). There's been no measurable advantage to these laptops going with that configuration. What's available are the market indicates that the Iris Pro is a competitive yet slightly inferior solution to just using a discrete GPU at this point in time. I expect gen 2 will get the technology and pricing right.

The reviews of the W740SU I read said the keyboard and build quality are poor, and that the w230st is overall better.

Those laptops are getting much better battery life not because of lower cpu and graphics (they're all equal to or better than the w740su) but just because Clevos are known for poor battery life. Also, the premium designs, while far less upgradable, can generally shove larger batteries in, and can dissipate more heat in a smaller package through the use of more elaborate cooling designs and better materials.

I was looking at the Clevos too, but they had a lot of negatives that made me avoid them. Also, once upgraded to have everything that I wanted, their prices are close to premium designs like the Dell XPS and Macbook Pro.

 

[PinchedNerve]

My point was that Iris Pro isn't getting design wins because it doesn't seem to bring any actual advantages over going with an Intel cpu + discrete gpu. There's only a handful of laptops with Iris Pro, the W740SU and the Macbook Pros (of which the 15" includes the barely faster 750m for some reason). There's been no measurable advantage to these laptops going with that configuration. What's available are the market indicates that the Iris Pro is a competitive yet slightly inferior solution to just using a discrete GPU at this point in time.

Your point was? The topic isn't about Intel cpu + discrete gpu, its about "Haswell more for its integrated graphics", as the OP put it.

As far as the OP's list of Intel CPU and GPU's that you say

Those laptops are getting much better battery life not because of lower cpu and graphics (they're all equal to or better than the w740su) but just because Clevos are known for poor battery life.

Anand just happens to have benchmarked a Clevo W740SU & 2 of the other listed LT's. I would list the Macbook Air, but it can only be compared in battery life.

Clevo W740SU vs. Lenovo X1 Carbon with the i5 3427U & HD 4000.

Clevo W740SU vs. Acer S7 (Haswell) with a i7 4500U & HD4400.

The Sony has a i7 4650U, the strongest in the OPs list. Here is a comparison vs. the 4750HQ

No idea what your beef is with the Clevo W740SU but it seems you don't know your hardware. I would say there is a very measurable difference with the integrated Iris Graphics vs. the rest of intels integrated graphics..

Edit: For what the OP wants "Haswell more for its integrated graphics", it seems the Clevo W740SU is by far the best option/bang for buck out there that I am aware of with the only penalty being "33% heavier" 1 lbs. If one pound is to much, then to each his own. The only thing is, the i7 4750HQ isn't Haswell, its Crystalwell.

 

[Fox5]

Your point was? The topic isn't about Intel cpu + discrete gpu, its about "Haswell more for its integrated graphics", as the OP put it.

As far as the OP's list of Intel CPU and GPU's that you say Anand just happens to have benchmarked a Clevo W740SU & 2 of the other listed LT's. I would list the Macbook Air, but it can only be compared in battery life.

Clevo W740SU vs. Lenovo X1 Carbon with the i5 3427U & HD 4000.

Clevo W740SU vs. Acer S7 (Haswell) with a i7 4500U & HD4400.

The Sony has a i7 4650U, the strongest in the OPs list. Here is a comparison vs. the 4750HQ

No idea what your beef is with the Clevo W740SU but it seems you don't know your hardware. I would say there is a very measurable difference with the integrated Iris Graphics vs. the rest of intels integrated graphics..

Edit: For what the OP wants "Haswell more for its integrated graphics", it seems the Clevo W740SU is by far the best option/bang for buck out there that I am aware of with the only penalty being "33% heavier" 1 lbs. If one pound is to much, then to each his own. The only thing is, the i7 4750HQ isn't Haswell, its Crystalwell.

You seemed to ignore a lot of the laptops I listed. If 4+ pounds is an ultrabook, then the W230ST, GE40 are both ultrabooks 2 and have a much faster graphics chip and similar price.


The OP's post asks for ultrabooks that can do light gaming. If the W740SU qualifies as this, so do several non-Crystalwell options. And so does the Macbook Pro, Dell XPS 15, and Razer Blade, albeit at a higher price.

So either the W740SU is an ultrabook and it has many faster options available in the same weight class, or the W740SU is not an ultrabook and the Macbook Air still retains the title of the fastest gaming ultrabook.

1 pound is a big difference when it moves you from Macbook Air to Macbook Pro. That's what 1 pound does.

 

[Infohawk]

The new HP Spectre 13 and Dell XPS 13 are not released yet and will also have the 4400. It seems like most manufacturers are going with the 4400 for their flagship 13" ultrabooks. Asus seems to be the only exception.