Crysis 3

With Crysis 3, Crytek has gone back to trying to kill computers, taking back the “most punishing game” title in our benchmark suite. Only in a handful of setups can we even run Crysis 3 at its highest (Very High) settings, and the situation isn't too much better for entry-level GPUs at its lowest quality setting. In any case Crysis 1 was an excellent template for the kind of performance required to drive games for the next few years, and Crysis 3 looks to be much the same for 2013.

Crysis 3

All of these GPUs need to run at low quality settings to get decent frame rates, but Iris Pro is actually the first Intel integrated solution that can break 30 fps here. Only AMD's desktop Trinity can claim the same. NVIDIA holds a 30% advantage, one that shrinks to 10% on the GT 640. Given the only difference between those two parts is memory bandwidth, I wonder if Crystalwell might need to run at a higher frequency here.

Crysis 3

Crysis 3

Battlefield 3 Crysis Warhead
Comments Locked

177 Comments

View All Comments

  • Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, June 3, 2013 - link

    The performance isn't earth-shattering, but if Intel manages to put out good open-source Linux drivers for Iris Pro, I can't help but feel like this would be a great chip for that; it isn't like you'll be playing Crysis in Ubuntu anytime soon. I kind of want that CRB (or something like it), actually.
  • tviceman - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    I'll bet notebooks with mid-range quad core CPU's and gt 750m discrete graphics will be cheaper than notebooks with Iris Pro enabled iGPU graphics as well. The only benefit would be a slightly slimmer chassis and battery life. Anyone who still wants to game on a notebook is noticeably better off with a mid-range discrete GPU over this.
  • esterhasz - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    On page four, the ominous launch partner is not "keen" rather than "key", I guess. I'd be very keen on having that rMBP 13" with IP5200, though.
  • Ryan Smith - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    Noted and fixed. Thank you.
  • tipoo - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    I'm very much in that boat too, a quad core 13" rMBP with Iris Pro would put it over the top.
  • MattVincent - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    totally agree. I wonder if apple will actually put a quad core in the 13" though. I bet they would rather sell more 15" rmbp's
  • jeffkibuule - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    Would a 47W chip be able to fit into a normal 13" Ultrabook-like chassis like the 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display? Only an extra 12W TDP to deal with.
  • esterhasz - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    This would be awesome and we have to remember that the 47W TDP includes voltage regulation moving off the MB, so the gap is maybe only 8W. The 47 TDP also refers to both CPU and GPU running at full speed, which is an extremely rare scenario - in gaming, the CPU load will probably hover at 50% only.

    In any case, if the tested model goes into a rMBP 13" I'm going to buy it before Tim Cook has left the stage.
  • nofumble62 - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    Thinking to buy a Ivybridge Mac Book Pro for my wife, I guess she will have wait a little longer for this baby. I wish they could fit in a Mac Book Air.
  • jeffkibuule - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - link

    Look at the price of those chips though, you're going to be dropping at least $2000 on such a laptop when the CPU alone is $478.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now