Intel Iris Pro 5200 Graphics Review: Core i7-4950HQ Tested
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 1, 2013 10:01 AM ESTQuick Sync Performance
The 128MB eDRAM has a substantial impact on QuickSync performance. At a much lower TDP/clock speed, the i7-4950HQ is able to pretty much equal the performance of the i7-4770K. Running Haswell's new better quality transcode mode, the 4950HQ is actually 30% faster than the fastest desktop Haswell. This is just one of many reasons that we need Crystalwell on a K-series socketed desktop part.
CPU Performance
I spent most of the week wrestling with Iris Pro and gaming comparisons, but I did get a chance to run some comparison numbers between the i7-4950HQ CRB and the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display running Windows 8 in Boot Camp. In this case the 15-inch rMBP was running a 2.6GHz Core i7-3720QM with 3.6GHz max turbo. Other than the base clock (the i7-4950HQ features a 2.4GHz base clock), the two parts are very comparable as they have the same max turbo frequencies. I paid attention to turbo speeds while running all of the benchmarks and for the most part found the two systems were running at the same frequencies, for the same duration.
To put the results in perspective I threw in i7-3770K vs. i7-4770K results. The theory is that whatever gains the 4770K shows over the 3770K should be mirrored in the i7-4950HQ vs. i7-3720QM comparison. Any situations where the 4950HQ exceeds the 4770K's margin of victory over Ivy Bridge are likely due to the large 128MB L4 cache.
| Peak Theoretical GPU Performance | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Cinebench 11.5 (ST) | Cinebench 11.5 (MT) | POV-Ray 3.7RC7 (ST) | POV-Ray 3.7RC7 (MT) | 7-Zip Benchmark | 7-Zip Benchmark (Small) | x264 HD - 1st Pass | x264 HD - 2nd Pass | ||||||||||||||
| Intel Core i7-4770K | 1.78 | 8.07 | - | 1541.3 | 23101 | - | 79.1 | 16.5 | |||||||||||||
| Intel Core i7-3770K | 1.66 | 7.61 | - | 1363.6 | 22810 | - | 74.8 | 14.6 | |||||||||||||
| Haswell Advantage | 7.2% | 6.0% | - | 13.0% | 1.3% | - | 5.7% | 13.0% | |||||||||||||
| Intel Core i7-4950HQ | 1.61 | 7.38 | 271.7 | 1340.9 | 21022 | 14360 | 73.9 | 14.0 | |||||||||||||
| Intel Core i7-3720QM | 1.49 | 6.39 | 339.1 | 1178.3 | 19749 | 12670 | 66.2 | 12.9 | |||||||||||||
| Haswell Advantage | 8.1% | 15.5% | 24.8% | 13.8% | 6.4% | 13.3% | 11.6% | 8.5% | |||||||||||||
| Crystalwell Advantage | 0.9% | 9.5% | - | 0.8% | 5.1% | - | 5.9% | -4.5% | |||||||||||||
I didn't have a ton of time to go hunting for performance gains, but a couple of these numbers looked promising. Intel claims that with the right workload, you could see huge double digit gains. After I get back from Computex I plan on poking around a bit more to see if I can find exactly what those workloads might be.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
177 Comments
View All Comments
Death666Angel - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
"What Intel hopes however is that the power savings by going to a single 47W part will win over OEMs in the long run, after all, we are talking about notebooks here."This plus simpler board designs and fewer voltage regulators and less space used.
And I agree, I want this in a K-SKU.
Death666Angel - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
And doesn't MacOS support Optimus?RE: "In our 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display review we found that simply having the discrete GPU enabled could reduce web browsing battery life by ~25%."
GullLars - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
Those are strong words in the end, but i agree Intel should make a K-series CPU with Crystalwell. What comes to mind is they may be doing that for Broadwell.The Iris Pro solution with eDRAM looks like a nice fit for what i want in my notebook upgrade coming this fall. I've been getting by on a Core2Duo laptop, and didn't go for Ivy Bridge because there were no good models with a 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 display without dedicated graphics. For a system that will not be used for gaming at all, but needs resolution for productivity, it wasn't worth it. I hope this will change with Haswell, and that i will be able to get a 15" laptop with >= 1200p without dedicated graphics. 4950HQ or 4850HQ seems like an ideal fit. I don't mind spending $1500-2000 for a high quality laptop :)
IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
ANAND!!You got the FLOPs rating wrong on the Sandy Bridge parts. They are at 1/2 of Ivy Bridge.
1350MHz with 12 EUs and 8 FLOPs/EU will result in 129.6GFlops. While its true in very limited scenarios Sandy Bridge's iGPU can co-issue, its small enough to be non-existent. That is why a 6EU HD 2500 comes close to 12EU HD 3000.
Hrel - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
If they use only the HD4600 and Iris Pro that'd probably be better. As long as it's clearly labeled on laptops. HD 4600 Pro (don't expect to do any video work on this) Iris Pro (it's passable in a pinch).But I don't think that's what's going to happen. Iris Pro could be great for Ultrabooks; I don't really see any use outside of that though. A low end GT740M is still a better option in any laptop that has the thermal room for it. Considering you can put those in 14" or larger ultrabooks I still think Intel's graphics aren't serious. Then you consider the lack of Compute, PhysX, Driver optimization, game specific tuning...
Good to see a hefty performance improvement. Still not good enough though. Also pretty upsetting to see how many graphics SKU's they've released. OEM'S are gonna screw people who don't know just to get the price down.
Hrel - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
The SKU price is 500 DOLLARS!!!! They're charging you 200 bucks for a pretty shitty GPU. Intel's greed is so disgusting it over rides the engineering prowess of their employees. Truly disgusting Intel; to charge that much for that level of performance. AMD we need you!!!!xdesire - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
May i ask a noob question? Question: Do we have no i5s, i7s WITHOUT on board graphics any more? As a gamer i'd prefer to have a CPU + discrete GPU in my gaming machine and i don't like to have extra stuff stuck on the CPU, lying there consuming power and having no use (for my part) whatsoever. No ivy bridge or haswell i5s, i7s without iGPU or whatever you call it?flyingpants1 - Friday, June 7, 2013 - link
They don't consume power while they're not in use.Hrel - Tuesday, June 4, 2013 - link
WHY THE HELL ARE THOSE SO EXPENSIVE!!!!! Holy SHIT! 500 dollars for a 4850HQ? They're charging you 200 dollars for a shitty GPU with no dedicated RAM at all! Just a cache! WTFF!!!Intel's greed is truly disgusting... even in the face of their engineering prowess.
MartenKL - Wednesday, June 5, 2013 - link
What I don't understand is why Intel didn't do a "next-gen console like processor". Like takeing the 4770R and doubling the GPU or een quadrupling, wasn't there space? The thermal headroom must have been there as we are used to CPUs with as high as 130W TDP. Anyhow, combining that with awesome drivers for Linux would have been a real competition to AMD/PS4/XONE for Valve/Steam. A complete system under 150w capable of awesome 1080p60 gaming.So now I am looking for the best performing GPU under 75W, ie no external power. Which is it, still the Radeon HD7750?