Intel Iris Graphics performance?

Hi,

I was wondering what the performance of this graphics card is? I'm not expecting anything stellar but is it comparable to entry or mid level dedicated graphics? Are there websites that test and benchmark this card? All I've found so far is this website that says it runs Bioshock Infinite:
Intel's Iris Pro integrated graphics tech hands-on: solid gaming performance on the go | Tech, Tech News | PC Gamer
Thanks

 

Around the same levels as the GT640M/730M

Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 - NotebookCheck.net Tech

Though i am not a fan of the Iris because of the heat it generates and the fact that it is only included in high end CPUs.

 

Yep, only in high end CPUs. So if you buy a high end CPU then you probably want the highest end GPU, which is not Iris. So it is kind of a mismatch. It does seem to lower the total power used, so it might be good for gaming on battery.

AnandTech | Intel Iris Pro 5200 Graphics Review: Core i7-4950HQ Tested

 

The intel 4750HQ is not high end and has Iris graphics. But I can't find any laptop in America that comes with it!

 

there is a clevo 14" model with it, tough the price is quite atrocious

 

Iris Pro is not in high end CPU's. It's in the embedded (read: soldered) CPU's. It's a 720p GPU that costs as much as what you can get with a quad core Intel i7 and a decent dedicated GPU that performs twice as well. Run at 1600x900 or 1920x1080, forget it. It's only because Intel could say they could really. I'll take an A10-5750m any day over an Intel with an Iris Pro. You can get an MSI GX60 with an A10-5750m and Radeon 7970m for $1200 vs any machine even with the lower end Iris Pro / CPU Combo like the Clevo W740SU with i7-4750HQ. Granted the Clevo is thinner and lighter, but in time if they offered an A10-5750m without dedicated GPU it would likely cost only about $700.

 

For $1200 you can get a i7-4700MQ with a 770m, in a Sager, which would be a much better buy than a GX60 anyways. I would never recommend a AMD APU at this current time.

 

Perhaps I misunderstood, but I remember reading several articles about it being at the top end, and being in high end all in ones or tablets. So I may have assumed... here is a sample Intel teases Iris Pro 5200 Haswell IGP | bit-tech.net

Seems pricing is high end?

I also looked at the performance, and decided they looked good on paper but real gaming performance was not yet up to decent AMD or Nvidia levels.

 

add usually 100 to the pricing of the equivalent quad core equipped with the 4600. Its not that ground breaking in terms of cost, but they really (read clevo) jacked up the price of it

 

Quad-core = high end. The i7-4750HQ alone is a 440$ part. For the same price, you could buy two i5-4440's and still have 80$ to spare.

And every laptop that houses a 47W quad-core these days has a dGPU, except the poorly-designed W740SU, which has heat issues, and an atrocious price.

 

I was interested in the Iris because of potential battery life gains compared to a dedicated graphics card (seems even with stuff like Optimus lots of them don't get very good battery life). I've read a few reviews on the Clevo that has the Iris though and seems battery life isn't that great anyways .

 

I agree with HTWingNut.

i7-4700HQ with HD4600 is 383$
I7-4750HQ with Iris Pro 5200 is 440$.

So upgrading a HD4600 to an Iris Pro is 57$.

Also, with things like Optimus, you end up being better off with a Nvidia Card anyways. Plus, you can always place the GPU away from the CPU, allowing for more creative cooling. Let's not forget goodies like MSI afterburner, and the fact that Intel drivers are meh overall.

Don't waste your time on the expensive W740SU, get something cheaper (W350ST/Y410P) and with better performance from a DGPU. Or if you want something ultrabook-thin for gaming, MSI GE40 seems a lot more attractive.

 

I'd rather pay $57 extra for a laptop to have the i7-4750HQ. I suggested this to Toshiba today.

 

thing is there's always a compromise. the clevo has pretty meh battery life and the msi has a godawful screen.

 

Bottom line, there is more to a laptop that just raw specs.

 

well bottom line for me is that it's not just about how much power i can get for my money, i need other practical elements too like it being portable and having good battery life.

 

You get what you pay for

 

Power wise I don't think the Iris Pro and 4600 are that different. As I understand it, under various usage patterns they trade power efficencies. But I haven't seen head to head benchmarks. This was discused back in July http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/724964-4600-hd-vs-iris-pro-5200-battery-performance.html

 

Power is one thing, heat is another.

 

Just responding to the OP regarding power and battery life. Heat is another issue. Fan power usage might be a small factor too.

Anandtech.com said this about the Iris Pro 5200 " Where Iris Pro is dangerous is when you take into account form factor and power consumption. The GT 650M is a 45W TDP part, pair that with a 35 - 47W CPU and an OEM either has to accept throttling or design a cooling system that can deal with both. Iris Pro on the other hand has its TDP shared by the rest of the 47W Haswell part. From speaking with OEMs, Iris Pro seems to offer substantial power savings in light usage (read: non-gaming) scenarios. In our 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display review we found that simply having the discrete GPU enabled could reduce web browsing battery life by ~25%. Presumably that delta would disappear with the use of Iris Pro instead.

Lower thermal requirements can also enabler smaller cooling solutions, leading to lighter notebooks. While Iris Pro isn't the fastest GPU on the block, it is significantly faster than any other integrated solution and does get within striking distance of the GT 650M in many cases. Combine that with the fact that you get all of this in a thermal package that a mainstream discrete GPU can't fit into and this all of the sudden becomes a more difficult decision for an OEM to make."

 

The Clevo W110ER could run quad core i7 and 650m well under 90W power consumption. The Iris Pro is nowhere near the 650m except at 720p low quality. Even then it trails by 10-20%. The 750m is an "enhanced" 650m, faster clocks, and runs 7W TDP cooler to boot. There is no compromise IMHO. You can go with 37W i7-4702MQ + GT 750m 38W TDP for 75W total TDP. The Anandtech review was with the highest end Iris Pro CPU too the i7-4950HQ. And cost is the biggest factor. The Clevo 14" with the i7-4750HQ costs as much as the 13" with i7-4700MQ and GTX 765m with four times the performance.

There's also no indication of power consumption, not to mention CPU performance suffers when the GPU is running full tilt.

 

I second what HTWingNut said.

My Y410p (4700MQ+GT750M) runs just a little under 90W, though Lenovo ships a 130W adapter for you to do SLI updgrades. This laptop can be purchased for under 800$....

Also, Integrated Graphic Solutions take away from your main ram...

Not to mention you can always move a DGPU away from the main CPU for a heat spread.

 

Doesn't the anandtech article say the Iris Pro plus the Hanswell TDP is 47 watts? Or are they saying the TDP is shared by Hanswell which itself is 47 watts?

Do you have more information on the CPU suffering when the GPU is fully utilized? Maybe a link?

 

47W is the TDP not necessarily the power consumed, although it can be fairly close. But rest of system also consumes power. I would like to see power draw of the system and temperature of the CPU.

 

I just wanted to say thanks to all who contributed here. I was all set to order the Clevo W740SU 14.1, but in light of the fact there is only 1 Windows based manuf. (apparently) using this IRIS solution sends up a red flag for me. All I need is a decent 14 or 15 (preferable) inch Win 7 or 8 laptop, good KB and excellent screen, full HD, decent (4-5 hour) battery life, USB 3 and/or eSATA out
Review Schenker S413 (Clevo W740SU) Notebook - NotebookCheck.net Reviews had my hopes up, but crackling, whining, bad KB .. WHEW
Also from the article : An interesting marginal note: When only Prime95 was performed, the CPU surpassed 100 °C within no time and the device issued a loud warning signal .... See YA

 

If a decent Iris Pro system cost $600-700 max, then it would be a decent machine. But they cost $1000+ and you can find much better options out there.

 

That is too expensive for Intel graphics indeed. I wonder have seen any laptop with the weaker 28W Haswell ULT parts? tests?

 

I think all of the Iris Pro notebooks is $1000+

Expensive indeed. Way better to go discrete GPU.

 

I guess I got caught in the HYPE, plus I want to dual boot Bodhi Linux (UBUNTU derivative) with Windows and am not real well versed with Linux at this point. I have seen many people with issues running switchable graphics under various Linux Distros. Plus there is one boutique etailer that will ship you the W740 with Linux installed so at least I knew it was doable. System76 Galago UltraPro Review – Clevo W740SU | bitflip.net

Thanks for input MR Koala, I was told FORGET ATI cards with or without switchable & to disable NVidia in BIOS to run Bodhi --- That is UGLY

 

Typing on a W230ST (GTX 765M) with Arch Linux right now. Switchable graphics runs out of the box (after installing needed packages and enabling bumblebeed ofc) with no issues whatsoever

Unless you really need a 2cm thick machine for some reason I don't see the point buying this model.