Ivy bridge integrated graphics

As intel claims that the new integrated graphics, featuring in ivy bridge will see a 60percent rise in graphics performance.

Does this seem like an exaggerated figure to anybody?

If this is true, does anyone think that it will run CAD programs much better than the hd3000, or will it still not be up to complex 3d work?

Will the overall package make much of a differance in gaming expirience?

Please leave your thoughts, thanks

 

Regardless of how much they pump up the raw numbers, drivers is where they are very weak.

 

CAD programs is mostly OpenGL- except Inventor i think - and HD3000 and such are even worse in openGL than in Dx.
Btw AMD bricked their Llanos CPU+GPU+GPU(economic) in OpenGL. Making the GPU(economic) work OpenGL instead the most performant.
So you can get an Intel CPU with an AMD card being almost 3x better than a Llano all AMD package in OpenGL.

Without benchmark nothing can be said about Intels but expectations for now should be low.

 

Intel's drivers have always been terrible. The hardware is actually decent, but they don't have the expertise of writing good drivers like Nvidia or even AMD (despite all of the flaws in Catalyst).

 

thanks guys, it will be interesting to see the capabillities of ivy bridge integrated graphics, i wish it were able to handle CAD programs.

 

60% faster than 0 is.... 0. Well, not quite that bad.

It's still bottom barrel performance, and the driver situation is still iffy. The cool thing it does is that it gets you graphics performance on par with a $30 graphics card. Even though the performance is there, it's not going to be consistent across all games, not like a $30 GPU is going to be a great performer anyway. If you aren't doing 3d, you can get away with not buying a graphics card at all, and save money. Once you get into the $50+ GPU range, you start obliterating the HD 3000. At $100+ you start getting into high performance graphics.

So that's pretty much the situation. The HD 3000 has simlilar performance to today's $30 GPU. The driver situation will make it inconsistent, so you won't be able to match the $30 GPU with ALL games and programs, occasionally it will be much worse.

If it were 60% faster, that's probably going to keep it about in the same segment. I think $30 graphics cards will probably also improve by about the same amount over the next several months, so you'll probably still see equal performance to low end graphics cards, with some unwanted inconsistency due to drivers. Even if there was no change to dedicated card price/performance (which constantly improves), 60% faster on the HD 3000 would just put the raw performance level between $30 segment and the $50 segment. It's still not enough to touch the same $50 graphics card that beats the HD 3000 today. You'd still deal with occasional terrible performance.

 

LOL if you need THAT LOW form of GPU performance, GO with Llano. MUCH MORE efficient. much more balanced. perfect for htpc. are they bumping up the processor raw power as well? if not i will but the 2500k right away

 

Llano graphics matches up to something a little bit better. It is more in line with $50 graphics cards. Even if Intel's planned successor to the HD 3000, that's supposed to increase performance 60%, does exactly that, Llano, which has been available since June, is still faster (for graphics) and MUCH cheaper ($135 for the highest end part).

Plus, you should get to use normal AMD graphics drivers. I'm not sure how that works, exactly.

Either way, if you're looking at $100+ graphics cards, there's no point worrying about llano or the hd 3000. Neither one is high performance. They basically both offer integrated graphics levels of performance in the CPU instead of on the motherboard. It really doesn't make a difference, yet. In the future, there could be some interesting results of that change. I guess it might help if you intend to upgrade your CPU but not your motherboard, but that's a really niche market.

 

Llano graphics are crippled with OpenGL which it what the OP needs.

 

Intel OpenGL drivers are the dumps.

If the person is planning on doing CAD, he should at the minimum just get the cheapest Nvidia GPU available, like the 520M or whatever it is now.

Nvidia OpenGL is just better than the competition including AMD. I have AMD and I will admit, AMD OpenGL drivers are crud. Got OpenGL to work for Rage, but now it's broken for all other OpenGL apps and OpenGL games. AMD is just OpenGL fail. ...And Intel is worse than AMD.

 

if you really need openGL and CAD you shouldn't be looking at integrated graphics. Just get a decent $100-150 graphics card and call it a day.

 

yes i understand what your saying

it will be interesting to see whether thunderbolt takes off in computers next year, it would be nice to be able to get an external gpu.