Intel Core i5 3470 Review: HD 2500 Graphics Tested
by Anand Lal Shimpi on May 31, 2012 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Ivy Bridge
- GPUs
Final Words
Intel's Core i5-3470 is a good base for a system equipped with a discrete GPU. You don't get the heavily threaded performance of the quad-core, eight-thread Core i7 but you're also saving nearly $100. For a gaming machine or anything else that's not going to be doing a lot of thread heavy work (e.g. non-QuickSync video transcode, offline 3D rendering, etc...) the 3470 is definitely good enough. Your overclocking options are significantly limited as the 3470 is a partially unlocked CPU, but you can pretty much count on getting an extra 400MHz across the board, regardless of number of active cores.
Intel's HD 2500 however is less exciting. This is clearly the processor graphics option for users who don't care about processor graphics performance. The 2500's performance is tangibly worse than last year's HD 3000 offering (which makes sense given the 6 EU configuration) and it's not good enough to be considered playable in any of the games we tested. The good news is Quick Sync performance remains unaffected, making HD 2500 just as good as the HD 4000 for video transcoding. In short, if you're going to rely on processor graphics for gaming, you need the HD 4000 at a minimum. Otherwise, the HD 2500 is just fine.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
67 Comments
View All Comments
MonkeyPaw - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
You can always go with the 2120T. It's only 35W (4 threads) and would beat the pants off the other 2 options you are considering.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
nubie - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
I have to second the G620, they are damn cheap, about half the price of the 2120T, and you aren't losing any level 3 cache.SleepIT - Friday, June 15, 2012 - link
I use the mini-ITX Atom-based boards running Ubuntu/Webmin for NAS's (OS on thumbdrive, 4 x 2Tb drives on the latest). Performance is stellar!majfop - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
Upping the Turbo Boost multipliers for the 400 MHz overclock is only on Z75 and Z77, right? That makes it very much less "free" I would say.There seem to be some reasonable budget option B75 and H77 motherboards, not to mention the previous socket 1155 offerings with an updated BIOS to accept the IVB processor.
iwod - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
I sometimes wish Intel could just present a Lineup for OEM, another for Retail Consumers. To greatly simplify Lineup. Just looking at the Lineup Hurts my brain and eyes, they could just offer all CPU with HT, 2 / 4 Core Variants with Speed Differentiation would be MORE then enough for me.Then AMD is plain stupid for not capturing more market shares with their APU. Their new CEO has it right, where he had watched AMD systematically shoot itself in the foot, over and over again.
BSMonitor - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
It's ALL for OEM's. Retail CPU consumers are such a tiny fraction of the pie. Consumers just jump in where the CPU fits them best.The only consumer aimed retail products are the high end i7 hex-cores.
silverblue - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
Rory Read wasn't responsible for Fusion in any way; the only thing he can realistically do here is to push as many resources at getting APUs out of the door as possible.thunderising - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
One could have atleast hoped for HD3000 in a 200$ chip, not HD2500 crapShieTar - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link
HD3000 is not 500 HDs better than HD2500, it is in fact an older, less capable version of HD graphics. The numbering scheme is admittedly silly, but thats to be expected from Intel by now.In the end, this CPU is not meant for gamers, not even if they want Ivy Bridge for a low cost. For 60$ less than the 3470 you will soon get the 2 core / 4 threads i3-3220. For a low budget gamer, this will still give you more than enough CPU power to team with any GPU you can afford. And those 60$ you saved can buy you an AMD 6670, which should be at least twice as fast as HD4000.
The 3470 makes much more sense for people that can accept minimal GPU power, but appreciate the increased CPU power of the (real) quadcore. Think office PC handling massive excel files with loads of calculations: Not enough to warrant a Xeon based system, but definitly enough to make the 60$ premium from a dual core worthwhile.
CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link
The idea that any poor sap has to game on any 2000, 2500, 3000, or 4000, or llano, or trinity, is too much to bear.What a PATHETIC place to be. How the heck is someone going to spend on HD3000 or HD4000 and the board and accompanying items and not have $75-$100 for say a GTX460 ?
I mean how badly do these people plan on torturing themselves and what point are they really trying to prove ?
They could get a $100 amd phemon 2 and a $100 GTX 460 if they want to game, and be so far ahead...
This whole scene is one big bad freaking JOKE.