Integrated intel hd graphics specifications. Features of the latest generation Intel graphics cards. Intel HD Graphics Performance Testing

Almost all characteristics of the latest generation Intel graphics cards, produced since 2015, significantly exceed those of the previous series.

The performance of the Intel integrated graphics cards is quite comparable to the parameters of the discrete, though not the most productive, video cards from AMD and Nvidia.

Of course, you shouldn't compare the capabilities of embedded hardware with flagship discrete video processors designed for demanding 3D applications.

At the same time, with the help of the built-in Intel cards, you can perfectly play games of two or three years ago at medium settings or launch new ones, albeit with minimum quality graphics.

Intel Integrated Graphics

Intel graphics cards embedded in cPUprovide the computer owner with the following benefits:

• reduction in the total cost of a computer - no need to buy a discrete video processor;
• the ability to work with the monitor even if the discrete gPU;

• reduction in power consumption - an ordinary video card requires from 50 to 75 W to work, and more modern models up to 275 W, the models built into the processor do not affect the power of the power supply at all;
• no need for cooling;
• integrated video cards can increase the amount of memory at the expense of shared RAM.

These features of Intel cards allow you to purchase a relatively inexpensive computer or laptop, without overpaying for the powerful graphics capabilities of discrete graphics, which are not needed by everyone, and besides, consuming more power and practically not suitable for laptops.

Meanwhile, the use of built-in video processors has certain disadvantages:

• much less features compared to discrete models, including lower data transfer rates and problems with launching new games;
• the amount of memory depends on the amount of RAM memory (there is no own RAM capacity).

Despite these drawbacks, developer Intel announced in 2015 a brand new 500 series GPUs, replacing the 5000-6000 models. The advanced graphics, both HD Graphics and Iris Pro Graphics, are designed to compete with the discrete Radeon R7 and R9 and GeForce GTX boards and, as the performance comparison shows, does the job well.

main parameters

Today, on modern computers using processors with integrated graphics, you can find three generations of Intel video processors:

• 4th generation, produced since 2013 using 22 nm process technology. This includes video cards from HD 4200 to HD 5200 that support DirectX 11.1 technology;
• 5th generation, already using the 14 nm process technology. Available since 2014, supports DirectX 12.0 and includes HD 5500-6200 cards;
• 6th generation (14 nm, DirectX 12.0, HD 510 to Iris Pro 580 series, Iris Pro 6000).

According to the manufacturer, Iris Pro video processors really outperform all other discrete card options and in terms of performance correspond approximately to the following models:

• Intel Iris 540/550 with 48 executive devices - AMD Radeon R9 M370X;
• Intel Iris 580, where there are already 72 executive devices - AMD R7 250X and Nvidia GeForce GTX 750.

At the same time, the speed indicators of the most popular Intel HD 530 graphics processor (24 execution units) can only be compared with the old and not very powerful AMD and Nvidia. Although it is this integrated video card that most processors are equipped with Intel Core i7.

There is no need to compare the memory sizes of such processors, since it depends on the size of the RAM. Minimum size for modern processors is 1 GB and increases as needed.

Play 3D graphics

One of the main requirements of a modern PC user for a video card is to run games with a resolution from HD to 4K. For these indicators, the following Intel integrated cards are worth highlighting:

• HD Graphics 530, which is powerful enough to use modern gaming applications on minimum settings (up to 30 frames per second);
• Iris Pro Graphics 6200, which supports FullHD resolution from 30-40 fps;
• Iris Pro Graphics 580, providing medium settings (at 60 fps) in games when using enough RAM (at least 16 GB).

Advice: It's worth noting that all of these GPUs are bundled with the latest Intel chipsets, which will cost a lot to buy. And, if you want to save money, it is more profitable to buy a separate AMD processor and a discrete graphics card of the same brand.

Working with video

Considering the characteristics of modern Intel graphics cores, one should dwell on their ability to work with video in FullHD and 4K formats. This indicator is very important for those who use widescreen TVs with a screen from 32 ″ as an additional or primary display. At the same time, the card does not require the same serious characteristics as in games - due to the lower frame rate (the standard for video is 24 frames per second) and the absence of the need for double or triple image buffering.

For a high-quality image, increased clarity is needed, which the built-in video cards of previous generations were not always able to handle. However, starting with Intel HD Graphics 4600, 4K movie playback has already become possible. And, all the more, the 6th generation models, including the HD 530 and any variant of the Iris Pro, do an excellent job with it.

Energy consumption

Reduced power consumption is far from being the first among the advantages of integrated video cards. Although, due to the low heating temperature of the processor and the absence of the need for additional cooling (the graphics core is cooled using the same system as the central processor), the computer motherboard can be installed in any case, including mini- and microATX. Sometimes integrated graphics processors are purchased precisely to minimize size, costs and power consumption.

At the same time, new Intel graphics cards require even less additional power supply power compared to the previous generation. So, the i7 processor itself, which includes the graphics core, consumes no more than 35-50 W and is suitable for installation even on laptops.

Summarizing

A detailed examination of the parameters of modern embedded video processors from Intel allows us to answer the question of whether they can replace discrete cards or are an unnecessary detail that increases the cost of the processor and is practically not used.

The answer option depends on the tasks that the user sets for a desktop or mobile computer.

If the main factor is playability, consider buying either a processor with the latest integrated graphics processors (Iris Pro), or an additional 4-8GB graphics card.

Intel processors are ideal for reducing heat build-up and allowing you to run non-graphics-intensive games and applications - while saving you money, space, and electricity costs.

In those cases, if the choice is still made in favor of integrated graphics, it is worth paying attention to the HD Graphics 530 processor, which is relatively affordable (as part of Intel i7 chipsets), fast and capable of launching a number of programs that could not work when using old integrated video cards.

Such a graphics core would be a good option both for online games and for working with photos or videos with not the highest resolution (HD and FullHD). Moreover, being inferior in capabilities to integrated video cards from AMD (such as the A10 series), Intel HD 530 is ahead of them in video playback capabilities, which makes it possible to use the computer as a home theater (when connected to an appropriate audio system and a large screen).

Even during the first acquaintance with processors on the Clarkdale core, we paid attention to one of their key features - built-in graphics core Intel HD Graphics... Then, in a review of Intel Core i5-661, we conducted preliminary performance testing of this graphics adapter, as well as tested its high-definition video decoding capabilities. In continuation, during testing, the first in our test laboratory motherboard on the Intel H55 Express chipset, solutions from the developer - Intel DH55TC, we even presented the results of attempts to play modern games.

But, since in all these materials the main attention was paid, nevertheless, to the capabilities of a particular processor and a particular motherboard, and the graphics core itself has several modifications and differs in frequency characteristics from processor to processor, we decided to in-depth study of the capabilities of Intel HD Graphics separate it into a separate material, collecting all the information available about it.

Let's start by reminding the theory. So, the new mass processors based on the Clarkdale core, more recognizable by the names of the models of the Intel Core i5, Intel Core i3 and Pentium G6950 series, are composite - under a 32 nm heat-distribution cover, the computing core is adjacent to a 45 nm crystal, which includes all additional controllers. such as memory controller and PCI Express bus controller, control and monitoring logic, and Intel HD Graphics.

Moreover, the processor contains only the computing part of the Intel HD Graphics graphics core - it is it that processes graphic information for 2D and 3D scenes or decodes high-definition video. The image prepared for output, frame by frame, is transmitted using the Intel Flexible Display Interface (Intel FDI) to the chipset, which is already responsible for outputting the stream through the digital interfaces DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort, and for the latter two adding a multi-channel audio stream , or transcoding for analog VGA (D-Sub) output.

Compared to previous generation video adapters that were built into Intel G43 / 45 chipsets, Intel HD Graphics has several advantages:

• there are 2 more execution conveyors;
• improved processing of vertices and work with the Z-buffer;
• the maximum operating frequency and the volume of the video buffer allocated from the RAM have been increased;
• added support for OpenGL 2.1;
• the ability to work simultaneously with two HDMI-outputs, including modes with multi-channel audio transmission and support for an extended color range, has been implemented.

An important emphasis is also placed on an improved unit for hardware high-definition video decoding and post-processing, which promises the ability to view up to two video streams simultaneously (picture-in-picture mode).

However, in different processors, this graphics core operates at different clock speeds, which should provide a noticeable difference in performance and facilitate their positioning. The fastest Intel HD Graphics is in the processor Intel Core i5-661, and possibly in some future models, operating at 900 MHz. It is interesting to note that this particular processor got into almost all test laboratories as an official sample and therefore many spoke about the effectiveness of the Intel HD Graphics based on its testing, although, as you can see, this integrated video adapter is so fast only in one processor.

The bulk of processors based on the Clarkdale core, all models of the Core i3 line and almost all Core i5, except for the Intel Core i5-661, have a video adapter that operates at 733 MHz, which theoretically makes it about 20% slower.

In the meantime, the only processor in the Intel Pentium G line - Intel Pentium G6950, the video core runs at 533 MHz, which confirms the positioning of this model as, most likely, the last and most budget representative of the Pentium series. But, given its maximum availability, you can expect that many budget users will have a computer with it.

It is precisely this range of capabilities due to different operating clock frequencies that we want to explore, both by comparing the new solution with the previous generation, and with the most budget discrete accelerators.

In order to give the most correct answer to the question about the dependence of Intel HD Graphics performance on its clock frequency, we took three processors - Intel Core i5-661, Intel Core i3-530 and Intel Pentium G6950 - and led them all to frequency 2.8 GHz disabling technology Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost for models that support them in order to maximally equalize the capabilities of older models with Intel Pentium G6950.

However, it should be noted that the Intel Pentium G6950 processor differs from the Intel Core i5 and Core i3-530 models by some other, most likely artificial, limitations and infringements: its cache memory is 1 MB less, the QPI bus frequency is only 2400 MHz. , and the built-in memory controller cannot work with DDR3-1333 memory, being limited by the effective frequency of only 1066 MHz. We did not look for ways to level these differences, since, on the one hand, they provide the maximum adequacy of results for the entire platform without taking into account the clock frequency of specific processor models, and, on the other hand, they allow a more adequate assessment of the increase in Intel HD Graphics performance compared to the previous one. generation of integrated video cards.

To compare the capabilities of Intel HD Graphics and Intel GMA X4500, we used a system based on the ASUS P5G43T-M PRO motherboard with an Intel G43 Express chipset and an Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 processor, which runs at a nominal frequency of 2800 MHz and has 3 MB of cache ... Such a bundle is very similar in parameters to a system based on Intel Pentium G6950. Moreover, it is very significant that both Intel HD Graphics and Intel GMA X4500 these systems operate at the same frequency of 533 MHz.

In addition, the memory controller integrated into the Intel G43 Express chipset does not support DDR3-1333 when operating in the nominal mode, unwittingly allowing one to evaluate the progress of various generations of integrated Intel video adapters under almost identical conditions.

And, of course, it was very interesting to compare the integrated graphics core with the most affordable external video cards, which should provide higher performance and better functionality, although they will not be as energy efficient.

Of the most inexpensive video cards, we have chosen LEADTEK GeForce 210 with 512MB DDR2 (210-512D2-SFLS-1-HDMI) and ASUS Radeon HD 4350 with 1 GB DDR2 (EAH4350SILENT / DI / 1GD2 / A), as the brightest and functionally similar representatives of the budget sector.

To make it easier to compare the capabilities of embedded solutions from Intel and budget discrete solutions from AMD and NVIDIA, we suggest comparing the capabilities of these solutions.

Comparison table:

* Calculated approximately based on the analysis of the performance of systems with an integrated video adapter in various modes.

Judging by the comparative characteristics, Intel HD Graphics is slightly inferior to budget discrete accelerators in terms of capabilities and the number of execution units, and also does not have its own video memory, although it can "borrow" an impressive amount from the system, but it has a relatively high operating clock frequency and, even with the most pessimistic estimates of energy consumption, it turns out to be 2-3 times more energy efficient. But, nevertheless, Intel promises performance sufficient for many games - let's try to check it out.

Intel HD Graphics Performance Testing

So, as noted a little above, for the most correct comparison new platform with an integrated video card with the solution of the previous intel generations GMA X4500, we used an ASUS P5G43T-M PRO motherboard and an Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 processor, and the rest of the tests were performed on the following system:

At the same time, discrete video cards were tested on the same system with an Intel Core i5-661 processor, which worked at the same 2.8 GHz clock frequency with disabled Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost technologies.

After examining the results, I immediately want to note some superiority of Intel HD Graphics over Intel GMA X4500, and, as can be seen from the processor test in Futuremark 3DMark'06, the influence of the architecture of the processors themselves on the result is minimal. However, we have to note and still some "rawness" of the drivers, although there has been noticeable progress, especially when working with OpenGL. We hope that in the near future, when the drivers are brought to the proper level, the superiority in all applications will be close to 20% only due to architectural improvements, and today the adapters built into Intel Core i5 and Intel Core i3 receive a tangible advantage due to the noticeably higher operating clock frequency.

Comparing the frequency modifications of Intel HD Graphics with each other, one can only confirm the theoretical conclusion - the higher the operating clock frequency, the higher the efficiency. But in numerical terms, this will not always be very noticeable. If, compared to the 533 MHz versions in Intel Core i5 and Intel Core i3, they look noticeably faster, then they do not differ so much from each other as to make a recommendation to unambiguously look for an option with the fastest graphics core, especially if we take into account the higher power consumption of such a processor.

Compared to the simplest discrete accelerators based on ATI Radeon HD 4350 and NVIDIA GeForce 210, all Intel HD Graphics options are inferior in performance. And if in synthetic tests, apparently due to optimization, the gap is not so big, then in gaming applications even an entry-level video card will be about 2 times faster. Of course, it is possible and necessary to note that the purchase of an additional card increases the cost of the system, as well as slightly its power consumption, so if you are not supposed to play on a new PC, then the built-in solution will be more profitable in all respects. In addition, on the external video cards included in the testing, it is not very easy to play modern games, especially if the owner has a widescreen Full HD monitor and wants to see all the effects. And buying a really gaming video card is a completely different matter, as well as choosing a processor for such a system.

Examples of games

Serious sam 2

Play in Serious Sam 2 on Intel Pentium G6950

Play in Serious Sam 2 on Intel Core i5-661

Let's start with a fairly simple, as it seems to us, game Serious Sam 2, in which a fairly high frame rate was recorded during testing, even at maximum settings. However, in practice, we had to slightly reduce the image quality to medium settings and play at 800x600, because in crowd scenes, despite maintaining a decent frame rate, there were "microfreezes" that did not allow good aiming.

Call of juarez

Play in Call of Juarez on Intel Pentium G6950

Play in Call of Juarez on Intel Core i5-661

The game Call of Juarez also turned out to be not so smooth - even with the minimum graphics settings, at times there were noticeable "drawdowns" to an uncomfortable level, although in general the performance of even Intel Pentium G6950 will be enough to pass this new game, though not seeing all the delights of one of the most beautiful games for DirectX 9.0c.

Race Driver: GRID

Play in Race Driver: GRID on Intel Pentium G6950

Play in Race Driver: GRID on Intel Core i5-661

But the newer and more resource-intensive game Race Driver: GRID for the integrated Intel HD Graphics cards turned out to be noticeably harder, especially for the slowest modification in the slower Intel Pentium G6950 processor. In order to somehow ride using Intel HD Graphics at a frequency of 533 MHz, I had to bring the graphics settings to the minimum state, and reduce the resolution to 640x480, observing ugly squares on a 24-inch monitor. Using the Intel Core i5-661, the performance has improved markedly, although there is no way to talk about complete gaming comfort.

Far cry 2

Play in Far Cry 2 on Intel Pentium G6950

Play in Far Cry 2 on Intel Core i5-661

Far Cry 2, an even newer and very resource-intensive game, turned out to be quite playable even on Intel Pentium G6950 with the minimum video quality settings and 800x600 resolution. At times it even seemed that Fraps in the upper left corner was writing slightly underestimated numbers, reflecting the current frame rate. And when replacing the processor with an Intel Core i5-661, as we saw earlier, it was even possible to increase the resolution to 1024x768 and set the average graphics settings.

In general, having tried to really assess the comfort of playing relatively new and far from new games, we can say that, despite advertisements and assurances, and even sometimes quite high numbers with an average frame rate during tests, Intel HD Graphics does not will satisfy the needs of game lovers, although in the absence of an alternative, it will allow you to look at many games and even go through some of them.

High definition video playback

Already during the first testing of Intel HD Graphics, we also tested the possibilities for accelerating high-definition video decoding. But then the experiment took place on an Intel Core i5-661 processor, which has the fastest integrated video card, so it was much more interesting to repeat the experience with the slowest solution in the line, because if the Intel Pentium G6950 copes with HD-Video decoding, then all other processors will the Clarkdale core will definitely be able to do this.

Film "Jumper"
File format: Matroska
Size: 9.45 GB
Video format: AVC
Codec: H.264 / AVC
Resolution: 1920x816
Audio track # 1: 6-channel audio in AC-3 format, Ukrainian.
Audio track number 2: 5.1-channel sound in DTS format, Russian.
Audio track # 3: 5.1-channel DTS audio, English.
Audio Track # 4: 2-channel Vorbis audio, English.
Subtitles # 1: in UTF-8 format in Ukrainian.
Subtitles # 2: in UTF-8 format in Russian.
Subtitles # 3: UTF-8 in English.

As you can see, even the video core built into the Intel Pentium G6950 processor almost completely assumes the responsibility for processing high-definition video streams. The processor load when playing the movie "Teleport" was at the level of 10-15%, and the image was uniform and clear.

The Chronicles of Riddick Film
File format: Matroska
Size: 16.6 GB
Bit rate: 16 Mb / s
Video format: VC-1
Codec: WVC1
Resolution: 1920 x 1080
Audio Track # 1: 6-channel AC-3 audio, English.
Audio track # 2: 6-channel audio in AC-3 format, Russian.

The heavier VC-1 format at a bitrate of 16 Mb / s was found to be more difficult for the Intel Pentium G6950 processor - at times its load reached 50%. But even with such a processor load, the movie could be watched comfortably.

Summing up, I would like to assure you with confidence that since even the Intel Pentium G6950, the slowest processor on the Clarkdale core with the slowest integrated Intel HD Graphics, is capable of decoding various high-definition video formats, then the rest of the models based on this core can become the basis of a modern media center ...

Outcome

Well, let's summarize the possibilities of the harbinger of future "systems-on-a-chip". It cannot be said that the Intel HD Graphics integrated into processors based on the Clarkdale core, even working in the fastest possible mode, provided a radically new level of performance, turning a system with an integrated video card into a full-fledged gaming computer. But, nevertheless, this graphics core is a step forward, providing the minimum necessary performance for all tasks of modern systems, even the simplest games, especially considering the total overhead costs for its acquisition and operation - when buying a processor, it is shareware, and compared to discrete cards much more economical. The only weak point of Intel HD Graphics is modern games. It's one thing to play with an old hit, and another thing to spend money on buying a modern fashionable game with a bunch of special effects that this "video card" won't allow to see. Therefore, if you plan to play comfortably, then you cannot do without a discrete accelerator, because even the simplest accelerator will provide twice the performance. But if games are secondary or even tertiary tasks for your system, then using Intel HD Graphics even in the slowest version inside the Intel Pentium G6950 processor can be considered the best option.

We express our gratitude to the companiesIntel , Kingston , Scythe andSea sonic for the equipment provided for testing.