
Comparing Intel HD 2000/3000/4000 Linux Graphics - wisesage5001
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTE2ODk
======
aw3c2
That's fairly weird to benchmark. Why not check for video acceleration and
that kind of stuff? Actually realistic use cases for those chips.

~~~
silon3
If they ran OpenArena and QuakeLive fast (~60fps), they't cover >50% of my
gaming needs.

------
akurilin
What exactly is Intel trying to achieve with these integrated GPUs? It seems
that performance-wise they're quite far below discrete graphics cards, so I'd
guess that they're not really meant for gaming.

Are they intended for everyday computing purposes that might require graphics
acceleration, such as high end display managers?

I'd certainly love to see them enter the graphics card arena and compete with
ATI/Nvidia by having phenomenal open source drivers. I'd vote for that with my
wallet.

~~~
reitzensteinm
Intel's only three generations into on die GPUs - starting with the 32nm
Westmere dual core chips.

They don't even have DRAM on the chip yet - normal graphics cards use
monstrously high bandwidth connections (10x higher than DDR3) to stream in
textures. HD 4000 et al just access main memory, competing with the CPU for
bandwidth.

They might be unimpressive now, but it's a focus of Intel to keep improving
them, and that will happen significantly faster than Moore's Law.

Also, it's wrong to compare them to discrete graphics cards. They're cheap and
low power, used in the MacBook Air. They replace the much inferior Intel
integrated graphics and nVidia chipset graphics (used in the original Air).

They're now nipping at the heels of low end discrete graphics chips
(especially on laptops). That's a great thing.

As a game developer, I'm excited by them. My games will run badly, but at
least now they'll run on even the cheapest computers.

~~~
wsc981
"As a game developer, I'm excited by them. My games will run badly, but at
least now they'll run on even the cheapest computers."

As a sidenote, John Carmack was reasonably enthusiastic about the latest
generation Intel integrated graphics at QuakeCon 2012 (at YouTube you can find
the whole 3,5 hour talk).

From [http://pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/John-Carmacks-
QuakeCon-20...](http://pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/John-Carmacks-
QuakeCon-2012-Keynote):

"Several factors have pushed iD in this direction. First off the hardware is
now good enough overall for gaming. The latest Intel processors have a
graphics portion that is entirely able to run games at decent resolutions and
quality settings."

Personally I started playing Counterstrike: Global Offense last week on my
2012 MacBook Air and it performs well (medium settings) on the integrated
Intel HD Graphics 4000.

------
nathanb
Do I just fail at reading, or do these benchmarks lack any context?

The question I want answered is how these chipsets compare with other
offerings. The context I would like to see is the same tests run on
low/mid/high-end AMD and nVidia parts using both the open-source and
proprietary drivers.

~~~
duskwuff
The number I've heard somewhere -- don't quote me on this! -- is that the
Intel HD4000 GPU is roughly on par with a low-end ($150 to $200) discrete GPU
from either ATI or nVidia. It's certainly nothing to write home about, but
it's more than sufficient for most tasks, and even workable for some light
gaming.

~~~
nemetroid
I believe you're correct that it's roughly on par with a low-end discrete GPU,
but your price point is way off. $50 to $75 is more appropriate.

------
karavelov
I was looking to buy mobo + ivy bridge CPU and I could not find a motherboard
that could drive my display that need dual link DVI or display port - most of
them have HDMI that could drive Full HD but not bigger monitors (my display is
24" 16:10, so it is not something extraordinary). So I am waiting for Ivy
Bridge processors and chipsets without integrated GPU (like Sandy Bridge
i7-3820)

~~~
haeikou
As far as I know 1920x1200 does not require DL-DVI; normal DVI should be
sufficient.

~~~
karavelov
You are right... Moreover I see now there are motherboards with display port
:)

------
MrDOS
What is the point of this? Obviously, 4000 > 3000 > 2000\. Of more interest
might be a head-to-head comparison of the performance of these processors
under Linux versus Windows.

------
mda
To Phoronix people: Please do not use terrible link ads.

~~~
kleiba
To mda: what's the point of posting that to HN's comment section?

