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

  • mrdude - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    Don't forget the persistent throttling...

    Although a GT3 +eDRAM Haswell ULV chip sounds fantastic for a gaming Ultrabook, if the thing is still limited to 17W and doesn't have room to stretch its legs then all you've got is great hardware without the performance to match.

    That's the only way Intel is going to get their Haswell and Ivy chips to below that 17W threshold: throttling. With HD4000 Ivy 17W ULVs there was some serious stuttering in gaming which the desktop and 45W mobile parts didn't have. Increasing the EUs and adding eDRAM is going to make that even worse. What you saw with the A15 throttling is what's going to happen on Intel's new low power chips (ULV included). Drop the clock speeds and throttle more aggressively to reach the target TDP.

    A lot of mobile companies are selling us chips with high turbo clock claims but if it only sits there for a fraction of a second, who cares? It's false advertisement, imo :P For a GPU that's a pretty big deal, especially if your frame rates are all over the god damn place.
  • R3MF - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    so we lose either way potentially.

    on the one hand, intel may start to tier the GPU tech, so removing a decent performance improvement to the very large majority of 3rd gen ultrabook users.

    on the other, even GT3 with edram may not actually provide much of a boost given the 17W limit combined with the fact that Haswell is also made on 22nm.

    i'm feeling like my ivy-bridge Samsung Series 9 has a much longer useful life ahead of it than previously anticipated.
  • mrdude - Thursday, January 10, 2013 - link

    They can improve perf-per-watt, but that TDP headroom isn't going to grow but decrease given the move to mobile and slimmer/sleeker products.

    Intel is also stating that they're going to get around the memory bottleneck issue that plagues modern day APUs by adopting eDRAM. While it's great for performance, it's also a much costlier solution and more expensive compared to a discrete GPU.

    For gaming in slim/small form factors that TDP threshold is the biggest hurdle. An HD4000 in a 35W/45W laptop chip performs much better than the HD4000 attached to a 17W ULV processor, not to mention provides much more fluid frame rates. Even if you increase the performance with a GT3+eDRAM variant you're still bottlenecked by that TDP and have no choice but to resort to throttling.

    14nm Broadwell could potentially alleviate that a bit, but it's still not a cure. The only remedy that could purge this issue is a cheap exotic form of cooling that allows for a higher TDP in a smaller form factor. I have more hope in exotic cooling methods than I do the diminishing returns of die shrinks.
    Short of advances like ^ that, there isn't much Intel or anybody else can do.

    Although implementing it would be a grand idea ;)
  • Spunjji - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    Increasing the EUs isn't necessarily going to make it worse. If they can bring said EUs down in voltage to hit a power/performance sweet-spot, more EUs running slower will perform better than fewer running faster at a less efficient point on the curve.

    Similarly I don't think the potential benefits of eDRAM can be ignored, *if* they implement it well. I would like to think they will...

    But yes, your general thrust here is correct. They're probably not going to get miracles out of this.
  • CeriseCogburn - Friday, January 11, 2013 - link

    It's pretty easy to call the Sandy Bridge a miracle cpu with a straight face.

    Then you can scream brutal pricing, oh wait you already did that, as well for this unreleased Haswell.


    Just last night the HD2000 in an i3/2120 on an H67 w just a single sata6 300gig velociraptor and 2x2 1333 impressed several to the point that they couldn't believe how fast the OS and surfing was (my install of course because I am the best), and then, even though we had angry birds type gamers, a few runs of Stronghold had them begging for more - the HD2000 @1920x1080 smoked right through it without a single glitch, slowdown, or driver problem - and pulled a 14,512 on 3dmark2001se bench, which it completed when amd gpu's often do not.

    The system response was so lightning fast even without an ssd ( the velociraptor was only pulling 125-130 on ASSSD read and write), I was even laughing in disbelief at the snapping lightning quick speed.

    That's what Intel delivers ( with a master like myself at the setup wheels ).

    BTW the owner hates amd (from personal experience instead of some corporate OWS profit whine) as much as you people hate Intel, so don't worry it wasn't me selling Intel, but prior desperately trying to recommend an AMD build which was met with anger and "not in my house!" type attitude...

    See, it's rough out there, like in here, only people in the real world are the exact opposite of you people, and some of us deal with them all the time.

    Bottom line - installation was so fast the whole room erupted in laughter, applause and disbelief for quite some time - the HD2000 gamed admirably and above required par for the not so into games besides angry birds needs.
    The system just SCREAMED speed the internet pages loaded so fast the pages just blinked from one to the other with no loading even visible, miraculous indeed.

    That's what Intel delivers. It's frikkin unbelievable.
    CHEAP SB laptops too for some time, creating addicts, literally.

    I guess the ridiculous complainers here like you will be disappointed, whining, wailing about the price, and generally claiming everything is a lie even after Haswell hits...
    W H A T E V E R.

    I can hardly wait for Haswell.

    I cannot expect the same from any amd setup - I could get caught in another endless amd NIGHTMARE easily with their crashing pieces of crap.( it almost always happens) It's not worth it. Apple has an "it just works" reputation, something AMD desperately needs.

  • nicolbolas - Sunday, January 13, 2013 - link

    i just made a 5800k system for myself. it took about 15 minutes, maybe, for me to get everything togethor and installing windows 7 from flash drive was fast to.

    The graphics have no problem, and nothing else is running wrong. Much better drivers than my Quadro NVS 140m (which is a card that is horrible to start with)

    It is just as fast as your i3 probably is (only due to the 1+ GHZ on clock speed it has on it) but beats it for gaming.

    That being said, i don't know how you can truly hate AMD, especially if you love Intel. Had Athlon not dominated/slightly beat (depends on time) the P4 intel might not have gone back to using the Core Arc. at least not when they did, we might have had another few years of P4 :S
  • Spunjji - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link

    You don't understand... Cerise's unsubstantiated claims are worth more than yours. Because that is how debating works!
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, January 15, 2013 - link

    See above you for who spews a pile a crap and why, because there is a debate rebuttal, one I left for your new buddy.
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, January 15, 2013 - link

    How does your theory of competition work now ? Since Intel has dominated amd cpu's for some time, why hasn't amd done a wonderful job of surpassing Intel, spurred on by the competition, as you claim Intel did only because amd dominated intel athlon vs p4 ?

    Does it only work when amd dominates intel, and not when intel dominates amd ?

    Maybe your theory is another pile of crap - oh wait it is, we have proof of that.

  • Spunjji - Monday, January 14, 2013 - link

    Thank you for collecting together so many assumptions about who I am and what I do into one nice long rant including some seriously egregious shit. It was informative. I can now ignore you happily. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now