Read more.But it doesn't seem to cover any pre-Haswell IGPs.
Read more.But it doesn't seem to cover any pre-Haswell IGPs.
WTB Spell check
Pretty poor compared to Nvidia and AMD automatic options. Screen shots do the job but only just - you'd need to either print them out or minimise/maximise the game multiple times to copy the settings. They could have at least put the settings into a nice table rather than screenshots. Not really sure who this will prove helpful too.
Another piece of software to optimise games that probably doesn't take resolution, desired frame-rate and feature preferences into account.
Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive
I can tell you the optimal settings for Intel HD graphics in any game. Turn everything down to its minimum setting, then turn the resolution down until you're getting a nice, smooth 15 FPS.
DemonHighwayman (11-06-2015)
Say that to the Broadwell Iris Pro IGPs.
Regarding the Intel site, it is indeed disappointing that it doesn't reach older IGPs like Sandy Bridge and older, as having a wide range of recommended settings (from raw fps to eye candy) on previous games would help improve the opinion that people have of Intel and gaming, especially considering the majority of systems have integrated graphics.
Pretty much the same for any integrated or low end graphics since the dawn of 3D graphics.
Some of the higher end Intel solutions are now OK at low resolution, or if you go for older games are fine. But really anyone who seriously plays modern games is going to buy a £100+ discrete card.
My point is that Intel's IGPs are now getting to a relatively similar level of their CPUs compared to AMD, namely having better performance (albeit at a higher price). While getting a Broadwell CPU for the sole purpose of HTPC and/or light gaming might be somewhat a niche (thinking of quiet and high performing 4K video machine), the CPU side of the chip is miles beyond what APUs can do.
For reference, here are a couple of gaming benchmark numbers:
I think you are being very kind to their pricing. I mean, double the 7870K price and only just beats it with a 28nm vs 14nm advantage? I am actually stunned how bad that performance is, AMD and Nvidia must be on the floor laughing. I would rather get the 4690 and put the saved money towards proper graphics.
I must say though that I have an old Pentium socket 1155 box that plays Minecraft quite nicely. For a vast number of primary school kids, that is enough.
Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive
The CPU is equivalent to the 4690, but more expensive. If you just want CPU, get the 4690 and save money. If you want graphics, buy a 4690 and put the savings towards a graphics card.
If it can overclock like the clappers then that would change things entirely, but not seen any results for that yet.
Good point, I just made the remark due to knowing way too many people that like to go on usual hate bandwagons regarding Intel integrated graphics (or any integrated graphics for that matter).
Fair enough
I personally always look at the CPU performance perspective as integrated graphics aren't something I need for my usage patterns, and that is the main selling point of that Intel APU duo (both i5 and i7 models) which makes up for a much stronger overall package than the current best APU from AMD, but it is indeed a very palpable price increase over the AMD offering.
Pretty much this.
Technically it does have a few advantages over Haswell counterparts, from better power consumption than the A10-7850K (only thinking of this specific AMD APU due to both CPU and IGP performance) which enables it to have the best power/performance ratio right now, better IPC that can be pushed forward through overclocking (although the same can be said of the 4690K) which can particularly be seen through better handling of x265 content and that rather interesting eDRAM that can be used in tandem by both the IGP and the CPU, acting as a rather beefy L4 cache on the latter.
I think this Intel generation shows some promise for the next couple of generations coming up, but specifically for those iris pro devices I just don't get it.
Forget the AMD stuff, just compare it to the Haswell refresh silicon. It is the same speed as that CPU, and it is more expensive. The extra expense gets you graphics which are just as adequate for general browsing, and still not up to scratch for gaming, so overall absolutely no change. If the eDRAM is worth having, then why do the gtx 980 benchmarks not look stellar? They don't, some games are faster than the old CPUs, some are slower, on average they are about the same and any difference is so slim that you couldn't tell from playing so as an L4 cache it fails.
Why is integrated graphics worth having? Because it is cheap. On my home server it is great, because that doesn't usually have a screen even plugged in but for those "why isn't it booting" moments I have somewhere to plug a screen in without bothering with a graphics card. Can you game with Integrated graphics? Yes, my daughter does, on an AMD APU but then she is only 10 years old and already I think she is seeing the limitations and I will need to put a proper graphics card in her machine soon.
Perhaps if Intel want to improve their graphics experience, then they could stop messing about with auto optimiser stuff and implement FreeSync so their struggle to hit 40fps will at least be tearing free.
Last edited by DanceswithUnix; 16-06-2015 at 07:23 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)