Intel graphics. They have come far. Where are they going?

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6332/50120.png
Source

Haswell came out and here is the review. They only had one review game the same as the previous reveiw and did not include hd 2500 or hd 3000.



I used the review above just for reference. Intel hd2000 was really weak, hd3000 is still pretty weak, hd 4000, and hd 4600 is actually decent for low end graphics. A Intel has such an impressive RnD budget and talent. I wonder how far they can go and how fast. Of course Apu's are far superior in the gpu portion. That is not the point. Where is intel going?

I bring this up simply for discussion.

 

I was watching them yesterday. I was pretty impressed when I saw Crysis Warhead's results.


50% increase in raw power would be good for next gen.

 

Not that impressive, although I was looking forward to that Intel Larrabee back then, too bad It was cancelled

 

No. They are not good for much... yet. If they can keep up a 50% jump each generation I while amd and nvidea jump 25% they will catch up eventually. How far intel graphics will go I do not know. That is really why I made this topic. I find intels graphics prospects highly interesting.

 

They have very much to cach up, just look at that graph it barely plays minecraft.
That igp needs to be trippled or more to be competitive with llano ,trinity or whatever else they do.

 

Too bad, I would have bought one if it ever would have come out as gaming graphics card. For what its worth i always consider Intel's Graphics Solution to have best video/picture quality out of all the others, call me crazy but even if they are slow the quality of games/movies/pictures tend to be sharper/clearer/smoother than the other GPU offerings. Now if it could match up the others in speed and bring all the quality goodness with it, that would be nice.

 

Its getting bigger and better every generation. Isn't haswell more igp than cpu now?

 

APU > IHD, esp in price per performance in non-dedicated graphics card gaming.

 

I do not deny that. It is 100%. Apu's have a better gpu than intels offerings all around. How long will that last though? Maybe a few years, maybe a decade or two.

 

AMD's Fusion blows Intel out of the water. Nough said, Intel does not allocate much of the die to the GPU whereas AMD does with Bulldozer and Piledriver cores giving AMD much better capabilities. That chart is bullshit. They have AMD's old 6550D and Intel's new 3770K(4000). Amd uses 7660D with their new Trinity APU's. whoever did thatcomparison is using an old APU vs a new intel CPU.

I did a comparison when I reviewed Trinity with my old club(no longer part of) vs the comparable pricepoint chip. The i3 3220K

 

That review I mentioned was before trinity. It was also the first one I could find as I did not look hard. It was only for reference. I'll get a better chart for reference, one with trinity.

 

Ahh, didn't see but the 7660D is even better.

 

Also I wrote:

 

Of course Apu's are far superior in the gpu portion. Anyone who says otherwise is deranged or trolling. That is not the point. Intel has come quite far. They have an impressive RnD budget to throw at graphics. Where is intel graphics going?

 

I don't think they will go anywhere unless they make some drastic changes to the way they are heading.

What I do find is that graphics is not very important to them, so they will continue to fail in that division.

 

IMO it is really up to Intel and the market.
I think trinity-like chips will be the future of laptops, thinner, efficient. As far as desktops go, personally it is hard for me to imagine not needing a dedicated graphics card.
That said, laptops are a big chunk of the market, and if it starts to hurt where it counts (revenues and such) I guess Intel has the resources to develop a good chip really fast.
Anyways, I should go ask my regular phsychic, futurology is not my thing...

 

They do have the resources and the market is moving that way...

 

I don't know where the market is headed anymore. Recession, direct ports, new consoles on the corner, the rise of SoCs, i5 powered tablets, AMD might fail in the near future, desktop keep declining, windows 8 was a dud...

 

Everyone says the market is moving that way and I believe that is hogwash. Smaller , faster has always been the mindset throughout history. I do not see businesses moving from workstations but convenience makes the market change in home computing for sure.

 

Well, as far as convinience goes, a pair of high powered rig at home and a hybrid tablet seems a good match.
Most users seem to not agree with me on this tough...

 

Because it's wrong. For power users and gamers and the like sure it's good (throw in a laptop and some servers there too ), but for most people high powered rigs are useless. Seriously, anything faster than Core 2 Duos are a waste for the vast majority of computer users.

 

So maybe software companies are to blame for the staleness going on...
Windows 8 could have some new features of wonder that actually used new hardware capabilities (besides not sucking so bad on the metro side).
You want a hybrid and a laptop? geez xD I can understand the servers tough. How about an apple too? Even if just the fruit

 

If anything MS should be praised for making it use resources wisely. If they had added stuff that maxxed out the hardware we have now it would be a righteous outrage about it. Unnecessary fluff is so yesterday. We want out computer to use less power yes?

 

Not exactly getting the message across... What I mean is there should be serious scaling involved. Everyone should be able to use the OS, and its base features, however adding options to take advantage of your better harware would be a plus in my book. Let's use aero for this. Is it necessary? No. Do I like it even tough it uses more power and resources for the sake of eye candy? Yes.
But you are right, I am just bitching, maybe because sometimes I no longer feel the need to upgrade, and it's harder to justify a want, tough I still indulge.

 

Ah I get it now. Yes eye candy is sweet but to a limit imo. Make it too taxing and it's not worth it. IMO of course. And aero has some nice features to it actually, like aero peek (you hover the mouse over whatever is in the taskbar and you see a smaller version of it pop up).