bit-tech.net

Intel teases Iris Pro 5200 Haswell IGP

Intel teases Iris Pro 5200 Haswell IGP

Intel has shared a few scant details on the graphics portions of its upcoming Haswell products, but is it saving the top-end IGPs for BGA-packaged parts?

Intel has released more details regarding the integrated graphics hardware that will form part of its fourth-generation Core processor family, codenamed Haswell - and indications are that it's gunning for AMD's accelerated processing units (APUs.)

Intel graphics have traditionally been the butt of jokes in the enthusiast market. While the company has carried out some research into dedicated graphics cards, which would be abandoned in favour of using the techniques discovered to create many-core co-processor boards for high-performance computing applications, Intel has typically ignored the high-performance graphics market. While rivals AMD and Nvidia battle it out to win the hearts - and, more importantly, credit card details - of gamers, Intel has bimbled along quietly producing on-board and, latterly, integrated graphics products that meet the needs of the vast majority of non-gaming and non-workstation users. For office applications, web browsing, video playback, Intel's integrated graphics processors (IGPs) work just fine - only losing their lustre when gaming is brought into the equation.

Gamers are only too aware of this fact: even when purchasing Intel processors with integrated graphics, they typically buy one - or more - dedicated graphics cards and leave the IGP unused. Even in the laptop market, where space and power are at a premium, it's typical to find a manufacturer cramming in a mini-PCIe graphics board and using tricks like Nvidia's Optimus to ensure the IGP only gets used in light, battery-friendly scenarios. Casual gamers, too, are starting to pay attention to AMD's APU products, the most recent versions of which include graphics capabilities that easily outstrip those of rival Intel - even if the processor itself isn't quite so impressive. When Sony's APU-powered PlayStation 4 - and, if rumours are to be believed, Microsoft's next Xbox console - hit the market, this will only accelerate.

Intel's answer: Iris Pro, the name given to the company's highest-performing IGP to be built into the upcoming Haswell-based fourth-generation Core processor family. The Iris Pro 5200, to give the IGP its full title, is based on what the company calls a GT3e 'graphics level' - putting it right at the top of the company's line-up, and significantly above the HD 4000 series at GT2. Designed for use in high-end desktops and laptops, the Iris Pro 5200 IGP will be joined by the Iris 5100, a GT3 part, and the non-Iris branded HD 5000. The reason for the three differing levels? Power draw: packing different numbers of execution units (EUs,) each increase in level will require a corresponding increase in power allowance and cooling - making the lower-performing parts more tempting for laptop manufacturers.

For lower-end Haswell parts, there are IGP options below even the GT2: some models are to be available with HD 2000 IGP parts, which Intel describes as either GT1 or GT1.5 depending on which slide you're viewing from the company's surprisingly detail-light press pack. Full details of what makes the Iris Pro so special have yet to be shared, but the company is targeting a twofold or higher improvement in performance over the IGP found in Ivy Bridge chips. Previously released information points to Intel using multi-chip module (MCM) packaging for the GT3 and GT3e parts, packing 40 execution units and the rumoured L4 cache memory which can be accessed by both the IGP and the CPU cores.

Full performance figures for the parts have yet to be released, but Intel has shared a few 'normalised' benchmark results: compared to the 77W Ivy Bridge Core i7-3770K, the 84W Haswell i7-4770K - its direct replacement, packing the Iris GT3 graphics hardware - manages a near-doubling of 3DMark11 performance, and almost 1.5x the 3DMark Vantage performance. Both, however, are eclipsed by the i7-4770R - which will replace the GT3 Iris IGP with the more powerful GT3e Iris Pro - which stops just short of tripling its predecessors 3DMark11 score and increases the 3DMark Vantage score by over 2.5x.

The result: a processor which, VR-Zone has claimed based on a leaked and as-yet unreleased Intel performance comparative graph, will outperform a discrete GeForce GT 640 graphics board. Sadly, that performance comes with a catch: some in the industry are claiming that the R suffix that differeniates the Iris Pro-based i7-4770R from its Iris-based i7-4770K brother indicates that Intel will only be releasing the processor in a ball-grid array (BGA) package - meaning it will come bundled with a motherboard, to which the processor will be permanently attached.

With Intel expected to formally launch the Haswell family at Computex in June, it's certainly looking like AMD is going to have a fight on its hands - to the point where some analysts are suggesting Intel could purchase its long-term rival, bypassing monopoly concerns thanks to the growing market share of ARM-based processors.

15 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
blackerthanblack 2nd May 2013, 14:34 Quote
While it good that they are upgrading their mediocre GPUs I think the buyers more likely to buy the higher end CPUs (to which the best GPUs are attached) are the buyers who will be more likely to buy a dedicated GPU card to go with it. Gamers and those working with 3d models will almost certainly require the grunt of a separate GPU rather than something which will just get by.

The ones who would benefit the most are in the space where AMD sit currently with its' APUs. But Intel CPUs in this space will be handicapped with the lower spec GPUs.
GeorgeK 2nd May 2013, 15:58 Quote
My thoughts exactly - why would you buy a 4770K and then use the IGP...
GoodBytes 2nd May 2013, 16:17 Quote
Here is why I am not exited about Intel chips:
-> The most highest end chip, has similar performance to a GeForce 650M.
-> Performance per Watt is actually very low. 84W, while the GeForce 650M is a fraction of this.
-> The time it comes out and be in store shelf, its GPU performance will come nearly as close as a ~2 year old dedicated GPU.
-> Driver support

Here is why I am exited about:
-> "Do you want free fries with your ketchup?" What I mean, is that Intel is pushing hard on their GPU solution. They are saying to people and OEM: High-power GPUs are needed.
This MIGHT make OEM thing about putting med-low range dedicated Nvidia/AMD GPU with laptops again. Right now, OEMs sees no value in putting a dedicated graphic card: It cost room on the board... a lot of it... and it cost more for them to add. The Intel GPU is free, and in the CPU. Beside as most people just surf the web... and not that (because you can argue about hardware accelerated web browser), but they use Google, and Facebook. Both web sites are super primitive in design. I am sure it will run fine on a good old Motorola Razor (the old slim flip phone). So there is no demand for a dedicated GPU, especially that Win8 interface is so simple.
azazel1024 2nd May 2013, 16:36 Quote
The 4470k IGP is nice in that if you aren't a gamer, the graphics are more than sufficient for pretty much anything you'd want to do. The improved IGP also means better GPGPU for the occasional application that supports it (say, Photoshop CS6). For a gamer, sure, it isn't going to be sufficient.

For the 4770R, that is 65w TDP, NOT 84w TDP. The clocks are slightly lower, but not by a huge amount. Keep in mind, the 650M + CPU is what the total TDP you are talking about. This is also a desktop part. The 5200 graphics are going to be in laptop parts as well, supposedly 47w TDP and maybe 35/37W parts as well.

47w TDP for a quad core Haswell CPU + 650M equivelent graphics FAR exceeds even a 35w TDP quad core Ivy Bridge processor + 650M graphics in total TDP and performance per watt. FAR FAR FAR exceeds.

For most desktop users, 650M equivelent graphics is way more than they need and heck, even for some gamers that is plenty of performance. It is better peformance than what I am running right now with my 3570 + 5570GPU (granted I am probably getting a 7790 in the nearish future).

For mobile users, 650M level of performance is probably enough, even for a lot of gamers.

It isn't like Intel was ever likely to suddenly come out with something with 10x the performance. In the end, unless someone comes up with some kind of truely revolutionary design, you are limited by the performance of the process technology and node side as to how much performance you can pack in to a certain TDP. You'll never get a 77w CPU + 150w descrete GPU all in to the same pack at only 84w of TDP. It isn't possible. What Intel has effectively done though is probably shoehorn a 50w TDP CPU and a 25w TDP dGPU in to the same die and between various clock gating and throttling gets the whole thing in to a 65W package (though neither CPU and GPU are going to be able to truely run 100% flat out together...but how often when you are gaming do you need all cores of the CPU hitting 100%???)

Broadwell comes along and the node size decrease opens another level of performance and so on and so on.

Intel is never going to have the equivelent of high end discrete graphics shoe horned in to their CPUs. They might have barely mid level graphics shoe horned in though and that is going to be more than enough for probably 90% of the computer market. Between Intels process and node size advantages, for the same GPU TDP, they can probably create a design at least 50-100% more powerful than what Nvidia and AMD can do. So If Intel has a processor with 30w set aside for the CPU and 17W set aside for the GPU, that GPU is probably more like the equivelent of a 34w discrete GPU. Not going to set the world on fire...but still not terrible.

I can tell you this, if I could have the 5200 in my next laptop I doubt I'd really be itching for better graphics any year soon. Sadly I know it won't be coming to ULV processors.

Though I am hoping maybe with Broadwell (roughly when I might upgrade from my Ivy Bridge based ULV "ultrabook") we'll see some ~25w TDP quad core processors with at least GT2 equivelent graphics and something like a resonable price tag (even if there are still ~35 and ~45w laptop parts, something in between 17w and 35w would be nice, especially if it had better graphics and quad core unlike 17w TDP. 25w is low enough that you can still create a rather thin and light weight design without breaking the bank for a 13-14inch laptop).
kenco_uk 2nd May 2013, 16:43 Quote
The 'R' model sounds good for a Wintel mitx PC hooked up to the living room TV.
GoodBytes 2nd May 2013, 16:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by azazel1024

For the 4770R, that is 65w TDP, NOT 84w TDP. . The clocks are slightly lower, but not by a huge amount. Keep in mind, the 650M + CPU is what the total TDP you are talking about. This is also a desktop part. The 5200 graphics are going to be in laptop parts as well, supposedly 47w TDP and maybe 35/37W parts as well.
Intel is talking about their highest end CPU. So 84w.
Quote:
47w TDP for a quad core Haswell CPU + 650M equivelent graphics FAR exceeds even a 35w TDP quad core Ivy Bridge processor + 650M graphics in total TDP and performance per watt. FAR FAR FAR exceeds.
Yes, but the GPU is far slower as well.
Quote:
For mobile users, 650M level of performance is probably enough, even for a lot of gamers.
Not really. It's borderline solid gaming performance for THIS year games.. and maybe next year. Won't pass 3 years though.
leexgx 2nd May 2013, 17:19 Quote
so 3x faster then slow still at least from the intel HD up can handle 1080p
xrain 2nd May 2013, 17:28 Quote
BGA's aren't permanent, just get yourself a BGA rework station and you can swap out BGA's all day.
Harlequin 2nd May 2013, 18:09 Quote
so intel are trying to catch up with AMD? who are just about the put GDDR5 on die for the next APU and along with GCN bump it up to something around a 7730
rollo 2nd May 2013, 18:45 Quote
The only reason they are bothering is because the likes of Apple / Microsoft have requested better onboard graphics for there Ultra Portable range of products.

AMD are a none player for both of these manufactures.

On the Desktop front the GPU from both amd and intel is overkill for HTPC builds and for the most part underpowered as a gamer chip. AMD is aproaching playable levels in certain games at 1080p ( with there fastest chip) but alot of games require massively reduced settings to get a playable frame rate.


Intel is not even close to this. But im not sure Intel actually sees the desktop as a market that has the numbers it is looking for from a product.

On mobile Intels chip looks good on paper low power draw decent performance. Could and will sell well to OEMs. AMD need to work on there power consumption to be a player in the mobile space again as there chips are too hungry for mobile applications at this time.

Personally would rather Intel gives us a cheaper 6 core Chip in the same Die space and boots the GPU into touch and id guess alot of us on this forum would feel the same way about it.
Gareth Halfacree 2nd May 2013, 18:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Intel is talking about their highest end CPU. So 84w.
No, the Iris Pro is in the R suffix model, not the K - which means a 65W TDP, not 84W.
GoodBytes 2nd May 2013, 18:54 Quote
Ah ok
azazel1024 2nd May 2013, 19:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Quote:
Originally Posted by azazel1024

For the 4770R, that is 65w TDP, NOT 84w TDP. . The clocks are slightly lower, but not by a huge amount. Keep in mind, the 650M + CPU is what the total TDP you are talking about. This is also a desktop part. The 5200 graphics are going to be in laptop parts as well, supposedly 47w TDP and maybe 35/37W parts as well.
Intel is talking about their highest end CPU. So 84w.
Quote:
47w TDP for a quad core Haswell CPU + 650M equivelent graphics FAR exceeds even a 35w TDP quad core Ivy Bridge processor + 650M graphics in total TDP and performance per watt. FAR FAR FAR exceeds.
Yes, but the GPU is far slower as well.
Quote:
For mobile users, 650M level of performance is probably enough, even for a lot of gamers.
Not really. It's borderline solid gaming performance for THIS year games.. and maybe next year. Won't pass 3 years though.

Nope, the 4770k will only have 4600 graphics, NOT the 5200 graphics. The 5200 graphics (Isis Pro) is going to be in the 4770R...which has a TDP of 65.

So in this case, no, you are incorrect.
ChromeX 3rd May 2013, 00:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by xrain
BGA's aren't permanent, just get yourself a BGA rework station and you can swap out BGA's all day.

Yup, because after spending who knows how much on the bundle, i'll have to spend another £1000+ on a rework station to separate the cpu and the board, both of which are now useless, since they cant be used for anything else!
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums