The Ivy Bridge Preview: Core i7 3770K Tested
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 6, 2012 8:16 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Core i7
- Ivy Bridge
Intel HD Graphics 4000 Performance
With respectable but still very tick-like performance gains on the CPU, our focus now turns to Ivy Bridge's GPU. Drivers play a significant role in performance here and we're still several weeks away from launch so these numbers may improve. We used the latest available drivers as of today for all other GPUs.
A huge thanks goes out to EVGA for providing us with a GeForce GT 440 and GeForce GT 520 for use in this preview.
Crysis: Warhead
We'll start with Crysis, a title that no one would have considered running on integrated graphics a few years ago. Sandy Bridge brought playable performance at low quality settings (Performance defaults) last year, but how much better does Ivy do this year?
In our highest quality benchmark (Mainstream) settings, Intel's HD Graphics 4000 is 55% faster than the 3000 series graphics in Sandy Bridge. While still tangibly slower than AMD's Llano (Radeon HD 6550D), Ivy Bridge is a significant step forward. Drop the quality down a bit and playability improves significantly:
Over 50 fps at 1680 x 1050 from Intel integrated graphics is pretty impressive. Here we're showing a 41% increase in performance compared to Sandy Bridge, with Llano maintaining a 33% advantage over Ivy. I would've liked to have seen an outright doubling of performance, but this is a big enough step forward to be noticeable on systems with no discrete GPU.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
195 Comments
View All Comments
The0ne - Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - link
"There's not enough of an improvement to make existing SNB owners want to upgrade, but if you're still clinging to an old Core 2 (or earlier) system, Ivy will be a great step forward."Basically all the laptops in the last few years for business have been bought with C2D. I think with Ivy, it's a great time to upgrade them all and see a good improvement. Same for family members too. I can't wait to try them out! Thanks for the review Anand.
benjaminbldp - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
maybe intel should drop the graphics all together, i don't like it, let the pro take care of it. just too much.dr/owned - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
This article blows because there's no overclocking results. We're not looking for a fine tuned overclock. Just give us the rough and dirty! My money is on 5 ghz with minimal effort using an air cooler.dagamer34 - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
It's a preview, not a review.dr/owned - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
It seems like Intel has the tick-tocks backwards. The i7-920 is arguably the greatest cpu to come out in recent years and it was "just" a tick.Wardrop - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
I'm afraid you have it backwards.The i7-920 is a Nehalem processor (it's a 45nm chip). It's a tock. Why is this concept so hard to grasp?
bigboxes - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
Look at the chart. Nehalem (i920) was a tock.just4U - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
I have to disagree with you on the i920 being such a huge leap. As someone who goes thru virtually every cpu line up for AMD/Intel I'd have to say the C2D (or quad) 6x series was the biggest leap forward in the past decade. Before that it was the A64 and X2 variants (altho.. we didn't get alot of use out of those secondary cores)IntelUser2000 - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
LOL, this must be the most hilarious argument I've heard in a while.How do you relate 30+ % graphics gain as being ALL CPU? Don't be ridiculous, and that's an understatement.
Silma - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
Are low-res testing really relevant for graphics?Most players play at 1920x1080 or higher.
1368x720 or 1680x1050 does not seem relevant to me at all for most people, especially those purchasing a computer with this processor.