So how does intel Core M HD 5300 compare to Intel Iris Pro?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Shivansps

Diamond Member
Sep 11, 2013
3,918
1,570
136
The thing thing that is a mess is the "Intel HD" thing, they even need a tool to figureout the driver to download. That needs to stop.
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,409
4,115
136
Yes, there's no doubt that Intel's nomenclature is a mess, and easily the worst of the three big GPU vendors.


I think Intel ran into naming/branding issue.
All Haswell 4xxx parts are 20EU's and 5xxx series Haswell parts are 40EU's.

Now with Broadwell if they simply stayed with that nomenclature then people "not in the know" wouldn't realize Broadwell 4xxx parts are now 24EU's with improved architecture and 5xxx Broadwell parts are 48EU's. So they increased the number to 5xxx which creates confusion with the Iris Haswell branded parts.

If they could have thought ahead a little bit they could have done something like 42xx to 45xx should have been Haswell 20EU and 46xx to 49xx should have been Haswell 40EU parts. Then logically Broadwell parts could have simply been 5xxx series, indicating increase EU's and new architecture. And it still would have been "1000 better" for those not in the know;)
 

AkumaX

Lifer
Apr 20, 2000
12,648
4
81
I believe there will be some benchmarks that even at default TDP the HD5300 could be very close to HD5000 at 15W TDP.

But once again the naming is misleading, HD5300 at 4-6W TDP could not be even close to 28W TDP HD5100.

bah i can't even understand why they would do this..
 

witeken

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2013
3,899
193
106
Core M is mostly going into tablets. Broadwell will still appear as Core i3/i5/i7, which would be what'd go in your ultrabook. Broadwell-U is about 3 quarters out.
More like 1.5 quarter.
 
Mar 10, 2006
11,715
2,012
126
Fair enough, but I honestly think that your purchase decision should not be based on specs alone. This is what reviews are for, although I admit it isn't realistic to expect that from "normal people". But this isn't the case just with things like parts nomenclature. How about whole products like iPhones? I'm very certain most people would be just as good off with a cheap, lower-end phone instead of an expensive $800 one.

I once thought exactly like this until I bought an iPhone 5s. There is tremendous value in the iPhone, and the resale value is ridiculously good (unlike the Android phones I've had).

iPhone has a pretty great total cost of ownership...buy a phone for $200-$300 on contract, use it for two years, sell it for $200+ and buy your next iPhone for $200-$300 on contract with the proceeds.
 

III-V

Senior member
Oct 12, 2014
678
1
41
The recent ones are super easy to fix. Might switch over next time I'm due for an upgrade. Might not, though, since that's 2+ years out, potentially. Depends how much battery life improvements are made.
 

imported_Thorburn

Junior Member
Jan 19, 2006
22
0
0
i bought an hp envy x2 13", and the truth, I'm really disappointed with the performance of the intel hd 5300 and core m 5y10 is worse than intel hd 4400 and very similar to intel hd 4200.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ntnHlkgtkQ

In my testing its slower than HD 4200.

As you'd expect you're highly TDP bound - I've found up to a 50% performance difference from running the 5Y71 at stock settings (4.5W) vs. the cTDP 'up' mode (6W) in one graphics test. Yes seems unintuitive that a 33% increase in power can yield a 50% improvement in performance, but that increase is pretty much all put in to the GPU portion of the SoC where as the initial 4.5W is largely taken up by the CPU and uncore portions.

Since HD 4200 parts have a higher TDP (10.5W) that generally outweighs the architectural and process improvements - even with HD 5300 in 6W mode.

Its still fairly impressive when you consider the power consumption though - Titanfall isn't FAR from being playable at 720p and low detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHhzjvirzDE

Iris 5100 is a lot smoother though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvUPl3GyYmE

Will dig out my HD 4200 test system at some point and do some comparison videos.
 

Magic Carpet

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2011
3,477
234
106
The thing thing that is a mess is the "Intel HD" thing, they even need a tool to figureout the driver to download. That needs to stop.
Damn right, I ended up getting the correct driver from a mobo vendor. That was confusing.
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
In my testing its slower than HD 4200.

As you'd expect you're highly TDP bound - I've found up to a 50% performance difference from running the 5Y71 at stock settings (4.5W) vs. the cTDP 'up' mode (6W) in one graphics test. Yes seems unintuitive that a 33% increase in power can yield a 50% improvement in performance, but that increase is pretty much all put in to the GPU portion of the SoC where as the initial 4.5W is largely taken up by the CPU and uncore portions.

Since HD 4200 parts have a higher TDP (10.5W) that generally outweighs the architectural and process improvements - even with HD 5300 in 6W mode.

Its still fairly impressive when you consider the power consumption though - Titanfall isn't FAR from being playable at 720p and low detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHhzjvirzDE

Iris 5100 is a lot smoother though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvUPl3GyYmE

Will dig out my HD 4200 test system at some point and do some comparison videos.

I was reading some reviews on the Yoga 3 Pro and saw similar conclusions. TDP is better, but performance hasn't improved really at all from the 11S I have sitting on my desk.
 

Shivansps

Diamond Member
Sep 11, 2013
3,918
1,570
136
Is this a genuine question or it has a lot of sarcasm ??

Its probably the same reason of why AMD calls Rx to its IGP now, like its 4.5W A10-6700T (and i still belive this name is shaddy) having an R6, while 65W desktop APUs have R3 and R5... pure marketing.

Still, the "Intel HD" thing is a lot more annoying than that.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
I would also look at the cache size on the processor. My i3 has a the HD4600 graphics and a 4 Meg Cache and cost $125 when I purchased it last year (Christmas 2013) on sale.