Intel Haswell GT3e GPU Performance Compared to NVIDIA's GeForce GT 650M
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 9, 2013 4:22 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Haswell
- Trade Shows
- CES 2013
Haswell isn't expected to launch until the beginning of June in desktops and quad-core notebooks, but Intel is beginning to talk performance. Intel used a mobile customer reference board in a desktop chassis featuring Haswell GT3 with embedded DRAM (the fastest Haswell GPU configuration that Intel will ship) and compared it to an ASUS UX15 with on-board NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M.
Despite the chassis difference, Intel claims it will be able to deliver the same performance from the demo today in an identical UX15 chassis by the time Haswell ships.
The video below shows Dirt 3 running at 1080p on both systems, with identical detail settings (High Quality presets, no AA, vsync off). Intel wouldn't let us report performance numbers, but subjectively the two looked to deliver very similar performance. Note that I confirmed all settings myself and ran both games myself independently of the demo. You can be the judge using the video below:
Intel wouldn't let us confirm clock speeds on Haswell vs. the Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) system, but it claimed that the Haswell part was the immediate successor to its Ivy Bridge comparison point.
As proof of Haswell's ability to fit in a notebook chassis, it did have another demo using older Haswell silicon running Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 in a notebook chassis.
Haswell GT3e's performance looked great for processor graphics. I would assume that overall platform power would be reduced since you wouldn't have a discrete GPU inside, however there's also the question of the cost of the solution. I do expect that NVIDIA will continue to drive discrete GPU performance up, but as a solution for some of the thinner/space constrained form factors (think 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display, maybe 11-inch Ultrabook/MacBook Air?) Haswell could be a revolutionary step forward.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
252 Comments
View All Comments
Rumpelstiltstein - Wednesday, January 9, 2013 - link
This could be Atom vs. GTX 680 and it wouldn't make a difference so long as it runs smoothly on the Atom.Dirt 3 isn't a particularly demanding game, so without performance numbers this tells us absolutely nothing.
Zink - Wednesday, January 9, 2013 - link
The Asus UX51 is probably hitting over 60 fps at these settings based on benchmarks I can find so the comparison is useless. If the Intel is hitting around 30fps, just enough to look smooth, that is right where we would expect performance to be. They could have used a GTX 680M and the comparison would have looked the exact same.CeriseCogburn - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link
Excuse me, vsync WAS OFF as per the article. This also as per the article:
" Intel wouldn't let us report performance numbers, but subjectively the two looked to deliver very similar performance. Note that I confirmed all settings myself and ran both games myself independently of the demo."
So we have a MASSIVELY experienced gamer / bench tester / reviewer /comparer telling you retarded doubting thomases exactly what occurred - and you pretty much ignore it, then directly refute it straight out of your imagination.
Thanks, it's been great fun watching the clueless insanely biased haterz pull another gigantic round of pinheadisms for page after page.
jwcalla - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link
You really shat all over this thread. I'm not sure why you brought up vsync in response to his comment. Vsync on / off has nothing to do with the point he made, which is that after a certain framerate you can't visually tell a difference, so when performance "subjectively looks similar", we can't really draw any conclusions.As long as the Intel is hitting the necessary framerate for smoothness, what conclusion can be made without numbers?
CeriseCogburn - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link
You're still a FREAKING IDIOT whom is the real shatter of big doo doo.you're WRONG
WRONG
WRONG
and wrong again
Run the dirt3 game yourself YOU IDIOT - at these settings... then report back the framerate YOU RETARD.
Thanks for being so stupid it's unbelievable - you frikkin experts know the framerate right ?
R O F L - YOU DON'T BUT I DO.
Spunjji - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link
...damn.mikato - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link
Haha this is just getting funny now.Medallish - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link
This is like watching Alex Jones being interviewed about Gun control.Spunjji - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link
Only somehow less coherent..?CeriseCogburn - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link
After the two amd fanboys declare the test irrelevant, they run into the GPU reviews and scream about 3 frames with the "winning" amd fanboys in 2 games at framerates nearing 100.Whatever doofuses.
" Intel wouldn't let us report performance numbers "
OH GUESS WHO SAW PERFORMANCE NUMBERS YOU BRAINDEAD MONKEYS.
Why must you torture sentient elite humans who can actually think and face reality without a thousand excuses ?