Intel Announces 'Iris' as Top Tier Graphics for Haswell

[InvalidError]

Obviously telling people the GT3 will smash a relatively low spec'd Trinity is the same old benchmarketing of old. If it fails Intel won't worry as they have the sale. This goes completely against what the constituant reviewers where projecting.

Anandtech had a hands-on GT3e preview where they concluded that GT3e looked great for an IGP and "could be revolutionary step forward."

For GT3e to be worthy of being called "revolutionary", I would expect it to at least beat Trinity's HD7660D: it would be shameful for a new flagship IGP with eDRAM to fail to beat a year-old IGP without eDRAM.

 

[mamailo]

A ( Iris + eDRAM ) Vs (APU+GDDR5)
I know who wins: The consumer
That´s why We need competition

 

[Matsushima]

If Intel had maybe put the better graphics card into budget models, they would have been more competitive and would have blown the A4/A6 to pieces, if the rumours are true and their graphics can beat an APU released last year.

 

[InvalidError]

If Intel had maybe put the better graphics card into budget models, they would have been more competitive

The i5-4570R is not a particularly high-end part:
- i5-3570: 3.8GHz Turbo
- i5-4570: 3.6GHz Turbo
- i5-3330: 3.3GHz Turbo
- i5-4570R: 3.2GHz Turbo

Notice how Intel shuffled specs and numbering around between IB and Haswell depending on features? Model numbers are becoming increasingly hopelessly confusing and meaningless since they rarely mean the same thing for very long.

So, while the i5-4570R may get mistakenly associated with "high-end" by association with the i5-3570K due to numeral similarity, the i5-4570R actually belongs at the very bottom of the i5 range with CPU performance about on par with the lowest-end of Ivy Bridge i5s.

Seems like a fair enough starting point to me: not many people with an i5-3330 would bother with particularly high-end graphics.

 

[Matsushima]

That is true, but I could very well play DX9 games and some low demanding games on a Llano/Trinity A4/A6 and save money, while the Pentium/Celeron HD Graphics would struggle more. Also Intel would need to cater for the budget segment, because OEMs like HP and Acer are packing APUs into budget desktops.

3570S=Low TDP
3570T=Ultra low TDP
R=Improved graphics

 

[InvalidError]

3570S=Low TDP
3570T=Ultra low TDP
R=Improved graphics

The point I was trying to make about model numbers is that the general assumption most not-exactly-geek people would make is that any CPU with "i5-4570" in it should perform similarly well.

Try comparing these chips CPU performance wise:
- 4570K
- 4570R
- 4570S
- 4570T
- 4570U
- 4570

Most of those are far from being interchangeable performance-wise. Same numbers, completely different meaning depending on suffix so making an accurate performance comparison between Intel chips requires going through spec sheets.

Funny how Intel originally decided to go with model numbers to avoid having to tack an alphabet soup to highlight features and now we have alphabet soup + model numbers that do not mean anything across different suffixes + a handful of exceptions to the general numbering+suffix scheme so we cannot trust numbering/suffixing trends.

 

[Matsushima]

The i5-4570R would compete wolith the A8/A10, leaving the budget market open to AMD.