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.



View All Comments

  • Rontalk - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    See here a proper mobile Trinity Review with 8GB DDR3 1600MHZ CL9 RAM. Check game settings to see what capable for, check 3DMark11 score which 200 more what Anadtech tested for:

    Stop being Intel fanboy ;)!
  • whyso - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    Not being a fanboy, being realistic. Claim of "almost 2x frame rates" is wrong. 200/1100 is about 18% better. In fact if there was one fanboy here it would be you for making the two times claim in the first place.

    I'd ignore 3d mark 11 when looking at AMD APUs. Despite the 630m getting a slightly lower 3d mark 11 score (1037 vs 1057 for gpu) it is significantly better than the 7660G.

    I've already made links on my previous posts about poor drivers in hybrid crossfre.

    The Anandtech review is perfectly legitimate. Anandtech used the notebook AMD GAVE him for benchmarking purposes. A $500 trinity a10 notebook is very likely not going to be using 8 GB of 1600 Mhz cl9 ram. Anandtech looked at trinity the way trinity is going to be presented and sold and the majority of trinity a10 notebooks will be similar to the anandtech one.
  • Rontalk - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    You realistic? You are a joke, who cannot realize anything. Do you think notebook check used always 8gb 1600 CL9 Ram? With what graphics settings? Very high settings were only aplied in 1080p... Anandtech clearly used crap memory, even if AMD gave them the laptop. How do you want than explain 3DMark 11 1338 point than? Do not you think if 3D Mark 11 measures 200 more point, than frame rates won't be significantly improved in games too? Have you seen the linked real world tests?
    Did you know turning details to high or ultra on AMD cost minimal FPs loss, when Intel graphics will die?
    Can you realize something?
  • Rontalk - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    Read here review what are they writing for this memory too; " By moving from one CL11 dimm to two CL9 dimms in my laptop (A10-4600M apu with integrated 7660G Radeon), I doubled my gaming framerate! Low voltage helps extend your battery life."

  • Spunjji - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    Dude, you seem to have missed the bit there where they changed to dual-channel memory at the same time as making the CAS-11 to CAS-9 change.

    Now, which of those things do we think made the *real* difference? And why do you automatically take their "double" claim at face value?

    Answers on a postcard to:

    The Real World,
    Not You.
  • CeriseCogburn - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    That's how it goes whyso... they claim 200%, it's 18% really, yet you are the fanboy for correcting them.

    Then they attack with more stupidity. Again and again they lie, are wrong, misteken, or bleeding amd brainfarts so gigantic no one can find even a massive cheating review that comes close to their spewed lie for the moment.

    Just remember though, since you don't agree with their wild eyed lies, since you don't denounce this hands on review above by this sites Founder and namesake, you are the fanboy.


    Good luck.
  • Rontalk - Saturday, January 12, 2013 - link

    I claimed 7660G is twice as fast as HD4000. I think 100% means that or no? If Anandtech measured 7660G 20% faster than Hd4000, than with another 18% (CL9 1600MHz) gonn 38% faster. At this point possible to give GPU job and let it work on High, Ultra settings or AA and OA on. The difference will jump to 100%! Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    Okay, that's a crazy stretch, and I think you also used a newegg review verified purchaser who just spewed his fanboy I bought it crap...

    I do appreciate the explanation, and your kindness in it's delivery, but it's the initial BS that is the real problem.

    So we give your little amd apu every break and upgrade in the world, then declare it thusly at your 100% or 200%, yet the above article is a big fat lie after Anand did the hands on that every hater decided to ignore 100% or rather 200% ?

    Yeah, whatever....

    Did find this though:


    I'm not risking that crashing piece of crap - if it was $200 or $300 dent and scratch refurbished I might put up with it.

    Anyway there's a good argument for you - DUAL AMD GRAPHICS $699 !

    I have not tried one of these hands on. If they don't spit and crash like mad...
  • nicolbolas - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    also i order a MacBook pro and it came with a HUGE dent in it.... all products have an amount that are damaged. How much, depends, that is more on the OEM than the CPU/GPU maker 0.o

    and, the RAM part is crazy, plus you cannot find 1866 in Laptops.

    i wouldn't be suprised if the 7660G is at least 70-80% with AA (playable) or 100%+ on ultra/high settings (unplayable)
  • nicolbolas - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    i see the product, but why are you saying "incase it is crashing?"

    i see only 2 reviews, which is not enough to make a good sample of people buying them, but i see no problem.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now