Haswell Integrated Graphics Promise 2-3X Performance Boost 133
crookedvulture writes "Intel has revealed fresh details about the integrated graphics in upcoming Haswell processors. The fastest variants of the built-in GPU will be known as Iris and Iris Pro graphics, with the latter boasting embedded DRAM. Unlike Ivy Bridge, which reserves its fastest GPU implementations for mobile parts, the Haswell family will include R-series desktop chips with the full-fat GPU. These processors are likely bound for all-in-one systems, and they'll purportedly offer close to three times the graphics performance of their predecessors. Intel says notebook users can look forward to a smaller 2X boost, while 15-17W ultrabook CPUs benefit from an increase closer to 1.5X. Haswell's integrated graphics has other perks aside from better performance, including faster Quick Sync video transcoding, MJPEG acceleration, and support for 4K resolutions. The new IGP will support DirectX 11.1, OpenGL 4.0, and OpenCL 1.2, as well." Note: Same story, different words, at Extreme Tech and Hot Hardware.
supports Display Port 1.2 (Score:2, Interesting)
the Hot Hardware link confirms DisplayPort 1.2, which is the only thing I /really/ care about. The others are nice, but 4K out of the laptop means my next mid-range laptop can be my primary desk machine as well. This should push along the display manufacturers after their decade of stalling (perhaps soon we'll see screens in the 20-24" range with more resolution than our 5" displays have).
The average user (Score:3, Interesting)
And all of those CUDA / OpenCL tasks are hardly representative of the average user.
There's a meme lately in Slashdot comment sections that everything must be made for "the average user" without any room to grow. I see it popping up whenever anybody mentions limits of a product sold to the public, especially artificial market-segmenting limits. Where did it come from?
Re:Worst thing about this (Score:2, Interesting)
I do HPC engineering for a living, and I really don't see the point in private discrete GPUs anymore. We've added 8000 Teslas to our cluster, and I've come to prefer using them over CPUs simply for performance reasons. But likewise I've come to prefer IGPs to discrete cards for private use in the last 2-3 years. There is no game that isn't playable on an Ivy Bridge IGP (last I've run is Skyrim on 1920p and settings in the middle between average and max, 40-50 FPS), the power usage is lower (in general but also when watching movies), complexity is tremendously lower (which translates into more stable drivers), it's cheaper and fwiw lighter.
Sure, if you're a CAD guy or 3D artist, you'll be able to to bigger stuff faster, but apart from those highly specific needs by a tiny part of the population (who can and should buy "specialised hardware", that means discrete GPUs), there is little advantage over IGPs.
You mention transcoding media, hardly a common task, but what's the problem with one core chugging away at it in the background while you use your other system resources? A GPU may do it quicker, but either you can't use it to it's full capacity for transcoding while at the same time playing that AAA title, or you're not needing the resources at the moment anyway, so "quicker" becomes nothing but a luxury.
VIdeo decompression is a moot point, as 500 MHz ARM chips can do full HD via DSP decoders, and you've got plenty of the latter on modern x86 chips.
The only somewhat "valid" point is e-peen: you'll get higher benchmark scores and feel better for having high-end hardware, which is up to everyone personally. I like the feeling of my tiny little "thingie" reaching the same goals more efficiently, with lower power usage, thermal emission and complexity.
captcha: tearful