Intel Iris Pro 5200 Graphics Review: Core i7-4950HQ Tested
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 1, 2013 10:01 AM ESTSleeping 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.
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.
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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
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'sjeffkibuule - 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.