Ivy to be 7-25% faster than Sandy plus 3x GPU performance

[georgec84]

Can someone please translate 3x the GPU performance of Intel HD2000 to something tangible? What approximate frame rate will you get in e.g. Battlefield 3 @ 1920x1200 with high quality settings?

That's the problem with early buzz like this - it lacks context and doesn't mean much. It's just marketing.

 

[joejoe666]

when will ivy cpus be available in laptops?

 

[soccerballtux]

3x faster than zero is still zero lololololo trollolololol....

 

[hectorsm]

Can someone please translate 3x the GPU performance of Intel HD2000 to something tangible? What approximate frame rate will you get in e.g. Battlefield 3 @ 1920x1200 with high quality settings?

Even if 3X were to be true we are still looking at speeds comparable to entry level discrete cards from AMD and Nvidia. It is safe to say it will not be playable (way less than 30fps) on high quality 1920 X1200.

 

[Nemesis 1]

That's the problem with early buzz like this - it lacks context and doesn't mean much. It's just marketing.

Actually I will take you to debate on this statement . If anything its been understated .

But For me its still not good enough. Same as LLANO sucks, WORSE. Intel doesn't lie this close to launch . Intel never overstates this close to launch .

AMD cann't tell truth because truth cann't be found inside this company.

 

[Idontcare]

IMO the question here regarding Ivy's GPU prowess comes down to how Intel is positioning the GPU prowess.

Llano was kinda dissapointing because AMD had positioned Llano is being the next best thing in laptop gaming, the synergies of Fusion were going to release untolds benefits on the end-user in terms of gaming and so on. Of course it couldn't do all that, games are still barely playable without a secondary discrete GPU.

I welcome a 3x improvement in Intel's GPU provided they aren't attempting to convince me that this improvement is going to make all the difference in me being able to use their GPU to play modern games on my laptop without the aid of a secondary discrete GPU.

I care about the 3D capabilities of my laptop for reasons related to productivity apps and web browsing. I don't want my system bogged down just because a flash ad is present.

But I'm not about to attempt to load BF3 onto a Llano or IB laptop that doesn't have a secondary GPU present, and its nuts for either AMD or Intel to attempt to convince me that I should think that I can. Don't set my expectations so high if reality is just going to dissapoint.

 

[Blitzvogel]

IMO the question here regarding Ivy's GPU prowess comes down to how Intel is positioning the GPU prowess.

Llano was kinda dissapointing because AMD had positioned Llano is being the next best thing in laptop gaming, the synergies of Fusion were going to release untolds benefits on the end-user in terms of gaming and so on. Of course it couldn't do all that, games are still barely playable without a secondary discrete GPU.

I welcome a 3x improvement in Intel's GPU provided they aren't attempting to convince me that this improvement is going to make all the difference in me being able to use their GPU to play modern games on my laptop without the aid of a secondary discrete GPU.

I care about the 3D capabilities of my laptop for reasons related to productivity apps and web browsing. I don't want my system bogged down just because a flash ad is present.

But I'm not about to attempt to load BF3 onto a Llano or IB laptop that doesn't have a secondary GPU present, and its nuts for either AMD or Intel to attempt to convince me that I should think that I can. Don't set my expectations so high if reality is just going to dissapoint.

Let's hope that Trinity boosts GPU clock speeds while supporting the most extreme DDR3 speeds. And maybe, just perhaps we could get triple memory channels?

 

[Kristijonas]

Sorry if this was discussed, but is Ivy Bridge GPU supposed to be faster than that of Llano? I'm dreaming of building a PC with decent integrated graphics.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Sorry if this was discussed, but is Ivy Bridge GPU supposed to be faster than that of Llano? I'm dreaming of building a PC with decent integrated graphics.

It should be close or equal, not better.

 

[Kristijonas]

Thank you, it will be interesting to see benchmarks once the CPUs are out.

 

[Fjodor2001]

According to this article Sandy Bridge HD4000 IGP will only be 35% faster than HD3000:

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/108695-hdd-shortage-intel-ivy-bridge-benchmarks-surface

That differs quite a lot compared to the original post in this thread which claimed the IGP should be about 300% faster. How can the performance estimates of the HD4000 differ so much? I know the original post compared the HD4000 to the HD2000 (and not the HD3000), but still 35% vs 300% is almost a factor 10x difference in estimated performance increase!

 

[IntelUser2000]

That differs quite a lot compared to the original post in this thread which claimed the IGP should be about 300% faster.

Number 1 reason: The comparison is with the HD 2000 with 6 EUs. The current top GPU is the HD 3000 with 12 EUs

Number 2 reason: You simply got the numbers confused. 30% gain = 1.3x, while the numbers were 200% faster, or 3x. The difference between 3x as fast vs 3x faster.

Number 3 reason: The 35% benched is using 3DMark06. That's a pretty CPU bound benchmark even in this class: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4444/amd-llano-notebook-review-a-series-fusion-apu-a8-3500m/10

They claim 60% in 3DMark Vantage over the top Sandy Bridge version, which is a much more demanding benchmark.

Now look at this: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4444/amd-llano-notebook-review-a-series-fusion-apu-a8-3500m/11

Basically, any game there that's running at GPU bound fps(5-25 fps) will be like 3DMark Vantage, and those that are CPU bound(35 fps +) will be like 3DMark06.