Pricing

Intel's launch lineup with Haswell is pretty spartan, but we do have enough information to get a general idea of what Crystalwell will cost as an addition.

Peak Theoretical GPU Performance
  CPU Cores/Threads CPU Clock (Base/4C/2C/1C Turbo) Graphics GPU Clock (Base/Max Turbo) TDP Price
Intel Core i7-4950HQ 4/8 2.4/3.4/3.5/3.6GHz Intel Iris Pro 5200 200/1300MHz 47W $657
Intel Core i7-4850HQ 4/8 2.3/3.3/3.4/3.5GHz Intel Iris Pro 5200 200/1300MHz 47W $468
Intel Core i7-4800MQ 4/8 2.7/3.5/3.6/3.7GHz Intel HD 4600 400/1300MHz 47W $378

The i7-4950HQ and i7-4850HQ are the only two Iris Pro 5200 parts launching today. A slower 2GHz i7-4750HQ will follow sometime in Q3. CPU clocks are a bit lower when you go to GT3, likely to preserve yield. Compared to the i7-4800MQ the 4850HQ carries a $90 premium. That $90 gives you twice the number of graphics EUs as well as the 128MB of eDRAM. Both adders are likely similar in terms of die area, putting the value of both at $45 a piece. Now you are giving up a bit on the CPU frequency side, so the actual cost could be closer to $50 or so for each. Either way, Iris Pro 5200 doesn't come cheap - especially compared to Intel's HD 4600.

From talking to OEMs, NVIDIA seems to offer better performance at equivalent pricing with their GT 740M/750M solutions, which is why many PC OEMs have decided to go that route for their Haswell launch platforms. 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.

 

Quick Sync & CPU Performance Final Words
POST A COMMENT

171 Comments

View All Comments

  • mschira - Sunday, June 02, 2013 - link

    Yea laptops benefit most - good for them.
    But what about the workstation?
    So intel stopped being a CPU company and turned into a mediocre GPU company? (can even beat last years GT650M)
    I would applaude the rise in GPU performance if they had not completely forgotten the CPU.
    M.
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Monday, June 03, 2013 - link

    You're exactly right.

    13" ultrabook buyers who need it the most get little to nothing out of this.

    And desktop users don't need or want GT3e and it uses system RAM. Better off buying a graphics card instead of upgrading to Haswell on desktops.
    Reply
  • glugglug - Tuesday, June 04, 2013 - link

    While I agree this misses "where it would benefit most", I disagree on just *where* that is.

    I guess Intel agrees with Microsofts implicit decision that media center is dead. Real-time HQ quicksync would be perfect to transcode anything extenders couldn't handle, and would also make the scanning for and skipping of commercials incredibly efficient.
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Core i5…4350U…Iris 5000…15W…1.5 GHz
    Core i7…4550U…Iris 5000…15W…1.5 GHz
    Core i7…4650U…Iris 5000…15W…1.7 GHz

    These should work. The 4650U is available in the Sony Duo 13 as we speak, though at a hefty price tag of $1,969
    Reply
  • Eric S - Monday, July 01, 2013 - link

    The last 13" looks like they were prepping it for a fusion drive then changed their mind leaving extra space in the enclosure. I think it is due for an internal redesign that could allow for a higher wattage processor.

    I think the big deal is the OpenCL performance paired with ECC memory for the GPU. The Nvidia discrete processor uses non-ECC GDDR. This will be a big deal for users of Adobe products. Among other things, this solves the issue of using the Adobe mercury engine with non-ECC memory and the resulting single byte errors in the output. The errors are not a big deal for games, but may not be ideal for rendering professional output and scientific applications. This is basically a mobile AMD FireGL or Nvidia Quadro card. Now we just need OpenCL support for the currently CUDA-based mercury engines in After Effects and Premiere. I have a feeling that is coming or Adobe will also lose Mercury Engine compatibility with the new Mac Pro.
    Reply
  • tviceman - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - link

    Impressive iGPU performance, but I knew Intel was absolutely full of sh!t when claiming equal to or better than GT 650m performance. Not really even close, typically behind by 30-50% across the board. Reply
  • Krysto - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - link

    When isn't Intel full of shit? Always take what the improvements they claim and cut it in half, and you'll be a lot closer to reality. Reply
  • xtc-604 - Saturday, June 08, 2013 - link

    Lol...you think that's bad? Look at Apple's claims. "over 200 new improvements in Mountain Lion" Reply
  • piroroadkill - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - link

    sh<exclamation point>t? What are we? 9? Reply
  • kyuu - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - link

    It's probably habit coming from eluding censoring. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now