Intel's Haswell Graphics gets a name: Iris

O

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,081
Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6926/intel-iris-iris-pro-graphics-haswell-gt3gt3e-gets-a-brand

2013-05-01_21-56-23.png


Anything with GT3e will have Intel’s Iris Pro 5200 graphics, while 28W SKUs with GT3 will have vanilla Iris 5100 (non-Pro). Any 15W SKUs with GT3 will be HD Graphics 5000, and GT2/GT1 parts will also be identified as Intel HD Graphics.

We know what makes Iris Pro special (128MB of eDRAM), but it appears that the main difference between Iris 5100 and HD 5000 is max GPU clock speed. Intel wants Iris associated with performance, which is a very good thing. Having Iris reach down into non-GT3e parts as well is a bit unsettling but at least GT3e gets the Pro designation.

Intel claims Iris/Iris Pro will deliver up to 2x better performance than Intel’s HD 4000 graphics in notebooks, and it’s using 3DMark11 to validate that claim:
Click to expand...

So, now we have Geforce, Radeon, and now Iris.
 
I was looking for a reason to get rid of my GTX 660. It explains why they're trying to move to 450mm wafers, they're only going to be able to produce 5 chips per wafer with those suckers. I'd still like to have my octo-cores instead, but then again tablets are taking over the world blah blah blah and all that hoopla.
 
It seems that intel only care about improve graphic on laptops and mobile device... "2X performance than HD4000" but in processors just 10% over ivy bridge.. In my most deeply dreams i just want to AMD make a miracle and become competent seriously to intel.. To see if we see a big scale of performance in their processors line.. Like was the jump from core 2 to core i series... But that not gonna happens soon if AMD do not push intel.. U_U..
 
How much will the cheapest GT3e equipped laptop cost us I wonder. That would be a perfect performance point for me, wondering if the price will match.
 
Ten bucks says that the highest end i7 on desktop requires this rubbish waste of silicon.
 
HeavensCloud said:
How much will the cheapest GT3e equipped laptop cost us I wonder. That would be a perfect performance point for me, wondering if the price will match.
Click to expand...

Since the high end GT3e is supposed to be the equivalent of a 650m, here are some comparisons to other ultrabooks and notebooks with the 650m:

$1900 and $2200 ASUS Ultrabooks with quad core Core i7-3612QM.

$899 to $2799 Notebooks/Macbooks with Geforce 650M and Core i5 or i7 processors.

And, with current tray prices of Core i5 and i7 mobile processors starting at $225 per CPU and up...

I would not put it past OEM notebook manufacturers pricing the lowest end notebook with an Intel GT3e with 128MB eDRAM no lower than $1000 USD and topping off at close to $2500 or $3000 for the highest end model.

Macbooks with Haswell and Intel GT3e graphics will likely start at $1999 and go above $2000.

These will NOT be cheap.
 
KazeoHin said:
Ten bucks says that the highest end i7 on desktop requires this rubbish waste of silicon.
Click to expand...

The desktop versions with the Iris 5200 are BGA only and have the R suffix. The socketed ones will have far lesser GPUs. It's going to be an even bigger PITA to decode what features Intel CPUs have now.

Sidenote: I fakking hate marketing...which eyeball part comes next?? Will AMD have Pupil®© APU graphics?
 
octoberasian said:
Since the high end GT3e is supposed to be the equivalent of a 650m, here are some comparisons to other ultrabooks and notebooks with the 650m:

$1900 and $2200 ASUS Ultrabooks with quad core Core i7-3612QM.

$899 to $2799 Notebooks/Macbooks with Geforce 650M and Core i5 or i7 processors.

And, with current tray prices of Core i5 and i7 mobile processors starting at $225 per CPU and up...

I would not put it past OEM notebook manufacturers pricing the lowest end notebook with an Intel GT3e with 128MB eDRAM no lower than $1000 USD and topping off at close to $2500 or $3000 for the highest end model.

Macbooks with Haswell and Intel GT3e graphics will likely start at $1999 and go above $2000.

These will NOT be cheap.
Click to expand...

jesus:eek:
 
pliskin679 said:
jesus:eek:
Click to expand...

It's always been known that eDRAM is expensive to manufacture. Unless Intel has found a way to cheaply manufacture these onto their mobile processors, we should expect these notebooks and ultrabooks to start above $1000 on the way up to $2000-plus, or even closer to $3000.

The only other company, for now, that uses eDRAM on a mass scale that I can think of is IBM. Their current POWER7 processors use up to 32MB eDRAM as the L3 cache at 4MB per core. There are only 3 lower end POWER7 models that are available as individual CPUs but only in pre-built server packages on the way up to multi-chip module (MCM) processors with as much as 128 CPU cores. And, those are not cheap. You're talking around $6,000 for the starting price and goes up from there.

The next processor to have eDRAM, IF the rumors are true, is the AMD APU going into the next Xbox. There is supposedly as much as 32MB eDRAM to act as an L4 cache for the GPU to compensate for the lower bandwidth DDR3 RAM.

So, with the highest end mobile Intel Haswell processor having as much as 128MB eDRAM on-die for the Iris Pro 5200, I would not be surprised the tray price for such a processor starts at $300 or $400 per CPU and goes up from there depending on core count and if Hyperthreading is enabled. Therefore, notebooks and ultrabooks will probably start at a minimum of $1000 and be close to $3000 for higher end models depending on processor model, RAM amount, screen size, storage options, and secondary GPU options.
 
So, 30W-ish for the "Iris Pro 5200", assuming the eDRAM doesn't suck up gobs of power (I don't really know). I wonder how that compares to the GT 650M, which I can't seem to find any hard numbers for.
 
wonderfield said:
So, 30W-ish for the "Iris Pro 5200", assuming the eDRAM doesn't suck up gobs of power (I don't really know). I wonder how that compares to the GT 650M, which I can't seem to find any hard numbers for.
Click to expand...

If you ignore the Anandtech article on Intel's demonstration, these are the closest you can get to hard numbers on the 650M's performance:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

So, the GT3e should perform around there.

Compared to the Intel HD 4000:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168+M5381aa68cbb.0.html
http://semiaccurate.com/2013/04/15/putting-intels-new-hd-4000-drivers-to-the-test/

The GT3e will be a lot faster. If going by S|A's HD 4000 (April 2013 driver) test and Notebookcheck's 650M test, we're looking at maybe double to triple the performance over an HD 4000 at low detail settings in Crysis 3.
 
I was referring to power consumption: I don't know how much power the GT 650M consumes.
 
wonderfield said:
I was referring to power consumption: I don't know how much power the GT 650M consumes.
Click to expand...

If VR-Zone is to believed, the two CPU models with the Iris Pro (GT3e 5200)-- i7-4850HQ and i7-4950HQ-- have a TDP of 47W.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Comp...i7-4850HQ-and-i7-4950HQ-Detailed-341024.shtml

http://twimages.vr-zone.net/2013/03/mobile_H-series.png

The 650M, according to Wikipedia, has a TDP of 45W.

Compared to the GT3-5100 (28W) and GT3-5000 (15W), the GT3e will probably consume a little more power.

How TDP translates to actual power consumption, I have no idea since I can't find hard numbers either.

One laptop tested on Notebookcheck measured a quad core i7 laptop with a 650M GPU to draw a maximum of 112W total. That should be a good starting point I hope.
 
I'm waiting for Ultrabooks that double as decent gaming machines (30+ FPS with some graphics settings on). That will be next notebook upgrade. Right now I still use an Acer Aspire from 2011 with dual graphics because nothing better has come out.
 
intel Gpus have alway been a joke until somebody proves other wise who cares?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top