For our discrete GPU benchmarks, we have split them up into the different GPU configurations we have tested. We have access to both MSI GTX 770 Lightning GPUs and ASUS reference HD 7970s, for SLI and Crossfire respectively. These tests are all run at 1080p and maximum settings, reporting the average and minimum frame rates.  Due to the limitations of the Bay Trail-D Celeron SoCs and their PCIe lanes, we cannot obtain numbers for these devices.

dGPU Benchmarks: 1x MSI GTX770 Lightning

F1 2013

F1 2013: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

F1 2013: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Bioshock Infinite

Bioshock Infinite: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Bioshock Infinite: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Tomb Raider

Tomb Raider: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Tomb Raider: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Sleeping Dogs

Sleeping Dogs: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Sleeping Dogs: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Company of Heroes 2

Company Of Heroes 2: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Company Of Heroes 2: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Battlefield 4

Battlefield 4: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

Battlefield 4: 1080p Max, 1x GTX 770

IGP Benchmarks: Synthetic dGPU Benchmarks with ASUS HD7970
Comments Locked

87 Comments

View All Comments

  • mikk - Thursday, May 29, 2014 - link

    G1820 is missing or at least a cheap Haswell Pentium.
  • hojnikb - Thursday, May 29, 2014 - link

    Yes that would be really great, since those chips are price about the same.
  • jospoortvliet - Sunday, June 1, 2014 - link

    These do use far more power.

    On that note, why on earth doid the reviewer compare power usage over idle (never seen that particular metric at anandtech?!?) While not mentioning the idle power (according to various other sites, the amd's sport significant lower idle power). I don't like to think so but this is probably the only power metric to make the atoms look remotely good... Why was it chosen?
  • savagemike - Thursday, May 29, 2014 - link

    I agree completely. If I were building a budget desktop right now that is exactly the chip (or similar) which I'd be comparing these to.
  • MikeMurphy - Thursday, May 29, 2014 - link

    I can buy a G3220 Haswell Pentium running at 3.0ghz for $60. I was really hoping this would make it into this review!!
  • Stuka87 - Thursday, May 29, 2014 - link

    The G3220 is a 53W chip. These are 25W chips. They do not compete with each other.
  • HisDivineOrder - Friday, May 30, 2014 - link

    Atom chips are 10W chips. These Semprons are 25W. They do not compete with each other.

    See how that doesn't impact the fact that people are talking about more than just wattage? ;) Some people just want to know what the best VALUE is per dollar and these low end options are all in the running.

    Why limit yourself to just discussing wattage-appropriate? Especially when those Semprons are already over twice the Atom chips in terms of watts.
  • bsim500 - Friday, May 30, 2014 - link

    "The G3220 is a 53W chip. These are 25W chips. They do not compete with each other."

    Intel's TDP is way overstated on its dual-cores. My "55w" i3 pulls about 32w in reality (measured at the wall, not calculated). I've seen Haswell Pentium's that are sub-30w, (full speed not the slow "T" variants). They are very definitely in the same bracket. In fact, at stock 3.4GHz, with a -0.15v undervolt, I can get my "77w" i5-3570 down from a measured 59w (1.1v) to around 47w (0.95v). At 3.0GHz at 0.83v, you're looking at 36w 4T / 25w 2T (for an i5). AMD's Kabini's are still on 28nm vs Intel's 22nm, and you'd be surprised just how low you can go with undervolting the latter's "big cores".
  • silverblue - Friday, May 30, 2014 - link

    The point is moot as AMD is known for overvolting its processors; an article on Kabini would be very interesting.
  • lyeoh - Sunday, June 1, 2014 - link

    Which is why this article needs some actual power consumption benchmarks.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now