Haswell isn't expected to launch until the beginning of June in desktops and quad-core notebooks, but Intel is beginning to talk performance. Intel used a mobile customer reference board in a desktop chassis featuring Haswell GT3 with embedded DRAM (the fastest Haswell GPU configuration that Intel will ship) and compared it to an ASUS UX15 with on-board NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M. 

Despite the chassis difference, Intel claims it will be able to deliver the same performance from the demo today in an identical UX15 chassis by the time Haswell ships.

The video below shows Dirt 3 running at 1080p on both systems, with identical detail settings (High Quality presets, no AA, vsync off). Intel wouldn't let us report performance numbers, but subjectively the two looked to deliver very similar performance. Note that I confirmed all settings myself and ran both games myself independently of the demo. You can be the judge using the video below:

Intel wouldn't let us confirm clock speeds on Haswell vs. the Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) system, but it claimed that the Haswell part was the immediate successor to its Ivy Bridge comparison point. 

As proof of Haswell's ability to fit in a notebook chassis, it did have another demo using older Haswell silicon running Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 in a notebook chassis. 

Haswell GT3e's performance looked great for processor graphics. I would assume that overall platform power would be reduced since you wouldn't have a discrete GPU inside, however there's also the question of the cost of the solution. I do expect that NVIDIA will continue to drive discrete GPU performance up, but as a solution for some of the thinner/space constrained form factors (think 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display, maybe 11-inch Ultrabook/MacBook Air?) Haswell could be a revolutionary step forward.

POST A COMMENT

253 Comments

View All Comments

  • DanNeely - Wednesday, January 09, 2013 - link

    The top end Haswell IGP is supposed to be a 40core model vs 16 in IVB. Even if they didn't touch the architecture at all that would be a nice boost. Reply
  • Spunjji - Wednesday, January 09, 2013 - link

    Not necessarily - there could be other limitations it butts up against internally. If they *have* changed the architecture then the cores may be individually weaker.

    Probably going to be a fair bit more powerful, though, all told. If you're prepared to pay for it.
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, January 09, 2013 - link

    I doubt it. They offered a 40core IVB GPU; but when only Apple expressed an interest decided to shelve it. Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, January 09, 2013 - link

    ... It's possible that was the same 40 core IGP they're offering for haswell; but I doubt they wouldn't've planned to bake in some level of improvements into it. Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    Exactly this isn't AMD we're talking about, otherwise
    Spunjji's theory would be 100% spot on !

    Thanks amd, for frying Spunjii's brain.
    Reply
  • Spunjji - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link

    Quite true. That doesn't necessarily exclude anything I've said previously, though. Historically, increasing the number of pipelines in a graphics engine does not lead to a direct proportional increase in performance unless the original solution was over-engineered or commensurate tweaks are made to the rest of the engine.

    That 40-core solution would presumably butt up even harder against the chips' thermal limits, which would mean it would give better maximum frame-rates but not solve the issue of throttling giving uneven performance in Ultrabooks where it is arguably of the greatest value.

    So, what we're saying here is we don't know how this will pan out yet. Maybe that's just because AMD friend my brain.

    *cough*
    Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    I have to comment that Intel having matched trinity in a few titles is a hurdle most here were screaming not so long ago "would never happen".

    Now Intel is barking up a 650M tree which is rather impressive for the recent loserdom they occupied for a decade at least in this area.

    I don't see a gargantuan win, but HD3000 could get one by, HD4000 was that much better, now we see this article has the smell of EXCITEMENT around the required skepticism.

    So it appears a large movement forward has been accomplished. A leap if you will.
    That is not bad - and compared to some of amd's tricks aka epic fail or fall back, it's good news.
    Reply
  • Spunjji - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    I actually agreed with the vast majority of what you said here. o_O Reply
  • mikato - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    Took his meds now. Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    You mean "didn't run into another spew from a lying sack of crap totally biased commenting amd fanboy so actually gave his own opinion instead ".

    Which is correct. LOL Yes of course it is. A grade far above the others here.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now