Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 66

Thread: 50% slower than AMD! Intel FAIL again with the HD4000 graphic hardware.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Thumbs down 50% slower than AMD! Intel FAIL again with the HD4000 graphic hardware.

    http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Proze...r-1407338.html

    Intel Core i7-3920XM HD4000=3DMark11 P615
    AMD A8 HD6620G=3DMark11 P1625

    In my point of view Intel is just Incompetent they just can't build fast GPU's

    AMD beat Intel with 1 year old stuff and I think Intel need another year or 2 to get the other 50% speed to.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,610

    Default

    Thats nothing really new. But you also don't buy laptops with amd onchip gpu for games. Most of the times you have got a desktop system with dedicated card for games - or at least a laptop with dedicated chip - which are really a bad idea as only for U are test solutions available to enable the chip. D does not allow parallel install of gfx drivers. So why should somebody really care about it? More important is accellerated video playback support to save energy - as extra bonus you get since snb i3 even a very fast encoder - i saw gb is working on gstreamer encode support for linux, vaapi exposes that interface as well, but my early speed tests have been a bit disappointing on linux. Using win it is really very fast when you maybe want to do a smaller version of your hd homevideo for your mobile device. I never used an app that uses gstreamer but maybe i try when it is done.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    I stopped reading Q's posts long ago. Some months back, he was making some semi-good posts. Now he's just trolling all over the place.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,039

    Default

    And how fast is the intel for real?
    Meaning: With today's intel driver vs today's radeon open source driver.

    Also, you left out the part where Quanta tries to sue AMD for letting their graphics chip run too hot.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,034

    Default

    Disappointing for Ivy.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Wasn't the latest AMD processor architecture a major failure? Plus, the power consumption and heat was considerably high even for a mobile chip. Intel's bread and butter is the cpu and processing power. Even if they're 'incompetent' at building a mGPU, AMD can't seem to build a competitive cpu particularly a mobile chip version.

    Their graphics divisions are good but they can't seem to release a decent driver. I guess no one is perfect.

    It still seems odd to me to put great effort into getting a 'gaming' laptop. Currently, it doesn't seem like any manufacturers do that very well. Heat and power consumption is a challenge even for basic laptops.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Thats nothing really new. But you also don't buy laptops with amd onchip gpu for games. Most of the times you have got a desktop system with dedicated card for games - or at least a laptop with dedicated chip - which are really a bad idea as only for U are test solutions available to enable the chip. D does not allow parallel install of gfx drivers. So why should somebody really care about it? More important is accellerated video playback support to save energy - as extra bonus you get since snb i3 even a very fast encoder - i saw gb is working on gstreamer encode support for linux, vaapi exposes that interface as well, but my early speed tests have been a bit disappointing on linux. Using win it is really very fast when you maybe want to do a smaller version of your hd homevideo for your mobile device. I never used an app that uses gstreamer but maybe i try when it is done.
    "But you also don't buy laptops with amd onchip gpu for games."

    why not? there are many people with no money for an extra Desktop system with an extra expensiv gtx580 graphik card.

    there are million of people with only money for 1 single notebook.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    And how fast is the intel for real?
    Meaning: With today's intel driver vs today's radeon open source driver.
    i don't know the intel hardware is to new to test this.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    Also, you left out the part where Quanta tries to sue AMD for letting their graphics chip run too hot.
    simple answer: Quanta will lose in court. because they are incompetent to.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Disappointing for Ivy.
    intel do have another viewpoint: they just point out that hd4000 is 50-100% faster than intels hd3000.

    but following the intel logic is this: a speed up from 0 fps to 1 fps is a UNLIMITED SPEED UP!!!! LOL

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    Wasn't the latest AMD processor architecture a major failure? Plus, the power consumption and heat was considerably high even for a mobile chip. Intel's bread and butter is the cpu and processing power. Even if they're 'incompetent' at building a mGPU, AMD can't seem to build a competitive cpu particularly a mobile chip version.

    Their graphics divisions are good but they can't seem to release a decent driver. I guess no one is perfect.

    It still seems odd to me to put great effort into getting a 'gaming' laptop. Currently, it doesn't seem like any manufacturers do that very well. Heat and power consumption is a challenge even for basic laptops.
    i think you don't have any clue about this tropic: "Intel's "cripple AMD" function" http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49

    AMD processor architecture are only a major failure because Intel cripple AMD and also intel force amd to make the cpus incompatible to intels instruction set: "Stop the instruction set war" http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=25

    In Fact you are complete incompetent to arguing against amd's CPU Architecture.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •