Comparing ultrabook processors.

Could you rank the following processors in cup and graphics performance?

If one is siginificantly slower than the next in line also mention it!

Core m5y70, core i5 4200u, core i3 5010u, core i5 5200u

 

I would go with:

i3 5010U < M 5Y70 < i5 4200u < i5 5200u

 

What makes you say the M processor is fasrer than the i3?

 

Right, I would choose the i3 over the M 5Y70. The M 5Y70 is essentially a tablet CPU or for fanless laptops with its 4.5W TDP.

See comparison here: http://ark.intel.com/compare/85212,75459,83612,84697

 

The Core i3-5010U, i5-4200U and i5-5200U are going to be very similar in performance. The i5's should be marginally faster in CPU intensive applications due to their Turbo Boost capability which dynamically increases the CPU's frequency as needed. Turbo Boost is quite useful and adds to system responsiveness.
The Core M series CPU's are for ultra-thin and/or fanless designs as noted. They're fine for general usage but quite a bit behind the i3/i5 in terms of raw CPU power.

The overwhelming question here is - what is the usage scenario? It's nearly impossible to provide any real advice without knowing the situation they'll be used in. CPU processing power is but one part of the equation.

 

The heaviest usage scenario would be League of Legends + Skype + 10 Chrome tabs + Bittorrent going at the same time.

I'd also like to be able to play Tera on Low Settings 900p

 

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-5010U-vs-Intel-Core-M-5Y70

 

Core i3 5010U vs Core M 5Y70: Core i3 is 5-15% faster depending on design. Actually, Core i3 is 5% faster than the Asus T300 Chi, against rest of the Core M systems Core i3 is 15% faster.

Core i3 5010U vs Core i5 4200U: Core i5 should be 5% faster
Core i5 4200U vs Core i5 5200U: Core i5 5200U is 10-15% faster

In GPU: Core i5 5200U = Core i3 5010U = 20% better vs i5 4200U, 4200U in in games maybe 20-40% faster than Core M.

Conclusion: Get the latest generation, but unless they improve a lot in the next generation Core M is basically a faster Atom that rips you off.

 

Mine is i7 4500U and it is completely ENOUGH ..
Play gamez even latest ones ..

 

Does it play BF4 on low?

 

All depends on how long the CPU has to boost. The Core M 5Y70 with it's 4.5W TDP won't be able to boost to its 2.6GHz frequency for very long, and likely spend more time closer to its 1.1GHz "stock" speed. Where the i3 5010U should be able to maintain its 2.1GHz frequency consistenly with a load.

Yes, please define "latest ones". I have an i5-4200U and it's far from able to play a lot of "the latest ones" including BF4, BF Hardline, Dragon Age Inquisition, Thief, Crysis 3, Far Cry 4, among many others. 720p at low settings it can run many recent releases, but most AAA 2014 and later releases, forget it. Although I have to say I can play many recent titles (say 2013 and earlier) with significant detail and resolution reduction. Some games just won't at all.

The biggest issue in general is the TDP. These chips will just throttle and/or bounce clock speeds between max rated and max boost, and everywhere in between. The IGP suffers as well, and has less priority than the CPU, causing some games to bounce in FPS.

In any case, with a dedicated GPU you will likely be better off, because the CPU is just acting like a CPU and not acting as the GPU as well.

 

Dont know why u laughing
B4 ? I could play on high details and some even ultra.. 720p
medium settings with 1080p

 

It is simple bcos u bit naive..
CPU doesn't play high role why u play gamez.. mainly GPU struggles..
Why u want have stupid marketing AAA ?
You think u will se the difference?
ON SUCH your tiny screen ?? 15''-17'' pleeesee...
I RATHER turn useless AAAs or HBAOs off (managing have 2x antialiasing)
Those games that I see they struggles 1080p I just use either 1336x768p or 720p
e.g. alien isolation well runs at 1080p dying light 720p with some details high
The Evil Within I played with no issues ,Far Cry 4 works well .. Wolfenstein new order too
Call of duty runs perfect . enjoyed game
u need to play with gpu settings and combine resolutions to match stable playing ..
You wont see difference even btw 1080p and 720p or 768
I rather sacrifice resolution rather than details..

 

AAA as in multimillion dollar budget games, not Anti-Aliasing. And I'm far from naive, I've been benchmarking hardware and games for years. I've done a ton of low end laptop gaming benchmarks and performance evaluations. Here's just one example: http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...50-and-radeon-8250-gaming-performance.743594/

And ULV will be reasonably OK if you have a dedicated GPU like you, but not using the IGP, which is what we're discussing here.

 

Alright OK sorry ..
With HD4400 there is IMPOSSIBILITY to play game today.. Tried use IGP and no way.. that is just for desktop use..
But I had my V7 quite long time and after playing dying light I sense laptop (GPU) reaches its limits.. BUT HOLDING STRONG...

 

We should also mention that with ULV processors, the manufacturer/system can severely limit performance of these chips sometimes. There has been a lot of discussion about this in the throttle stop thread. Sometimes the more expensive processor may not yield higher performance depending upon settings from the manufacturer.

 

Yes, good point. The ULV CPU's can be artificially limited, which is too bad. If we had more control over the CPU, they could perform so much better.

 

Some insulting posts were deleted, along with the needless provocation leading to them. Warnings issued accordingly.

Please just keep it nice, gentlemen.