Sleeping Dogs

A Square Enix game, Sleeping Dogs is one of the few open world games to be released with any kind of benchmark, giving us a unique opportunity to benchmark an open world game. Like most console ports, Sleeping Dogs’ base assets are not extremely demanding, but it makes up for it with its interesting anti-aliasing implementation, a mix of FXAA and SSAA that at its highest settings does an impeccable job of removing jaggies. However by effectively rendering the game world multiple times over, it can also require a very powerful video card to drive these high AA modes.

Sleeping Dogs

At 1366 x 768 with medium quality settings, there doesn't appear to be much of a memory bandwidth limitation here at all. Vsync was disabled but there's a definite clustering of performance close to 60 fps. The gap between the 650M and Iris Pro is just under 7%. Compared to the 77W HD 4000 Iris Pro is good for almost a 60% increase in performance. The same goes for the mobile Trinity comparison.

Sleeping Dogs

At higher resolution/higher quality settings, there's a much larger gap between the 650M and Iris Pro 5200. At high quality defaults both FXAA and SSAA are enabled, which given Iris Pro's inferior texture sampling and pixel throughput results in a much larger victory for the 650M. NVIDIA maintains a 30 - 50% performance advantage here. The move from a 47W TDP to 55W gives Iris Pro an 8% performance uplift. If we look at the GT 640's performance relative to the 5200, it's clear that memory bandwidth alone isn't responsible for the performance delta here (although it does play a role).

Once more, compared to all other integrated solutions Iris Pro has no equal. At roughly 2x the performance of a 77W HD 4000, 20% better than a desktop Trinity and 40% better than mobile Trinity, Iris Pro looks very good.

BioShock: Infinite Tomb Raider (2013)
POST A COMMENT

169 Comments

View All Comments

  • GameHopper - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    Why no real power measurements? If it's so important to iris Pro, real world power numbers will be more useful than just listing TDP of the parts Reply
  • shinkueagle - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    The GIANT has awoken! Performance-wise, its amazing! Destroys Trinity! Price-wise.... Well, the area needs some work... Reply
  • trip1ex - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    Yes really disappointed there is no socketed cpu solution that have the best igpu config.

    But I suppose I already have Ivy Bridge i5 for my WMC pc and it is good enough. Still be a nice cheap way to build a secondary small desktop that could also do some light gaming.
    Reply
  • Lataa - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    dikicha23@gmail.com Reply
  • vFunct - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    Curious why Intel just doesn't go straight for the jugular and release a discrete GPU part on their 22nm process. NVidia/AMD is stuck at 28mm because of their foundries, and it appears Intel's GPU architecture is feature complete and therefore competitive with the discrete parts if they scaled up everything by 4x or 5x.

    NVidia & AMD should be worried about their core high-profit-margins business!
    Reply
  • jamescox - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    The photo you have on page 4 showing the 2 separate die is strange. The haswell die should not be square. Other photos I have seen show the expected (extremely rectangular) haswell die and a tiny ram chip. I would expect a haswell based chip with double the cpu (8 real cores), and no gpu eventually; this would be almost square. Do you know why your chip does not match other multi-chip module photos online? Reply
  • jamescox - Tuesday, June 04, 2013 - link

    I guess the other photos are haswell plus an integrated chipset in the same module. The photo of the two die is still strange, as neither of these look like a haswell die. Reply
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 04, 2013 - link

    That's because that's the picture for GT3e Iris Pro 5200 graphics. The bigger square die is the Haswell CPU+GT3 GPU, while the smaller one is the on-package DRAM.

    The dual core with on-package chipset is even longer than the regular Haswell.
    Reply
  • TheJian - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    This is useless at anything above 1366x768 for games (and even that is questionable as I don't think you were posting minimum fps here). It will also be facing richland shortly not AMD's aging trinity. And the claims of catching a 650M...ROFL. Whatever Intel. I wouldn't touch a device today with less than 1600x900 and want to be able to output it to at least a 1080p when in house (if not higher, 22in or 24in). Discrete is here to stay clearly. I have an Dell i9300 (Geforce 6800) from ~2005 that is more potent and runs 1600x900 stuff fine, I think it has 256MB of memory. My dad has an i9200 (radeon 9700pro with 128mb I think) that this IRIS would have trouble with. Intel has a ways to go before they can claim to take out even the low-end discrete cards. You are NOT going to game on this crap and enjoy it never mind trying to use HDMI/DVI out to a higher res monitor at home. Good for perhaps the NICHE road warrior market, not much more.

    But hey, at least it plays quite a bit of the GOG games catalog now...LOL. Icewind Dale and Baldur's gate should run fine :)
    Reply
  • wizfactor - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    Shimpi's guess as to what will go into the 15-inch rMBP is interesting, but I have a gut feeling that it will not be the case. Despite the huge gains that Iris Pro has over the existing HD 4000, it is still a step back from last year's GT 650M. I doubt Apple will be able to convince its customers to spend $2199 on a computer that has less graphics performance than last year's (now discounted) model. Despite its visual similarity to an Air, the rMBP still has performance as a priority, so my guess is that Apple will stick to discrete for the time-being.

    That being said, I think Iris Pro opens up a huge opportunity to the 15-inch rMBP lineup, mainly a lower entry model that finally undercuts the $2000 barrier. In other words, while the $2199 price point may be too high to switch entirely to iGPU, Apple might be able to pull it off at $1799. Want a 15-inch Retina Display? Here's a more affordable model with decent performance. Want a discrete GPU? You can get that with the existing $2199 price point.

    As far as the 13-inch version is concerned, my guesses are rather murky. I would agree with the others that a quad-core Haswell with Iris Pro is the best-case scenario for the 13-inch model, but it might be too high an expectation for Apple engineers to live up to. I think Apple's minimum target with the 13-inch rMBP should be dual-core Haswell with Iris 5100. This way, Apple can stick to a lower TDP via dual-core, and while Iris isn't as strong as Iris Pro, its gain over HD 4000 is enough to justify the upgrade. Of course, there's always the chance that Apple has temporary exclusivity on an unannounced dual-core Haswell with Iris Pro, the same way it had exclusivity with ULV Core 2 Duo years ago with MBA, but I prefer not to make Haswell models out of thin air.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now