# Intel Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge GPU Performance



## W1zzard (Apr 24, 2012)

This week saw the release of Intel's new 22 nanometer Ivy Bridge processors. The new CPUs also feature a beefed up graphics core that is faster and includes support for DirectX 11. In our review we test 18 games to investigate whether HD Graphics 4000 can provide a decent gaming experience.

*Show full review*


----------



## qubit (Apr 26, 2012)

It's great how CPUs can now be reviewed like graphics cards.


----------



## NC37 (Apr 26, 2012)

Thank you for the good assortment of game benchmarks. First site I've seen to include so many. Heck, first one I've seen that includes BF3.


----------



## mtosev (Apr 26, 2012)

hmm the integrated gpu is faster than the gt 520nice


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 26, 2012)

Any chance for some non game related GPU tests?


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Apr 26, 2012)

I personally think the i5 2400 is the price/perf champ for that market segment, and worth the extra $15 or so dollars for hte extra 300mhz.  But totally agree that a core i5 and a 6870 is a great budget concious rig that can handle most games @ 1080P.


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 26, 2012)

TheLostSwede said:


> Any chance for some non game related GPU tests?



everything non-gaming related and media playback works great. anything specific you have in mind?


----------



## GSquadron (Apr 26, 2012)

The benchmarks are totally fake:










6670 better than 7970??? O.O
I would not like to say the fps i get with my card, seriously.


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 26, 2012)

so you missed it 4 times? that must be a new record


----------



## GSquadron (Apr 26, 2012)

It is not my fault though.
Both benches say Dragon Age II 1280x800 2xAA.
Why don't you state them on the bench?
writting more makes it harder to understand


----------



## Fourstaff (Apr 26, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> It is not my fault though.
> Both benches say Dragon Age II 1280x800 2xAA.
> Why don't you state them on the bench?
> writting more makes it harder to understand








This looks appropriate


----------



## brandonwh64 (Apr 26, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> The benchmarks are totally fake:
> http://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/HD_7970_Lightning/images/dragonage2_1280_800.gif
> http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_3770K_Ivy_Bridge_GPU/images/dragonage2_1280_800.gif
> 
> ...


----------



## ERazer (Apr 26, 2012)

great compare to last generation

still sux for igpu


ty wizz! great review


----------



## erixx (Apr 26, 2012)

massive review! thanks Wiz!


----------



## Dent1 (Apr 26, 2012)

Looks like the old school AMD APU is spanking Ivy Bridge. Trinity should be exciting.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Apr 26, 2012)

Meh, no ones buying IB 3770K for igp, when do we get CPU review?


----------



## rpsgc (Apr 26, 2012)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Meh, no ones buying IB 3770K for igp, when do we get CPU review?



And the people who'll buy IVB for the iGPU (i.e. not enthusiasts) will still be stuck with the crappy HD 2500


----------



## Joe Public (Apr 26, 2012)

Obviously, using AA is kicking the IGP's butt.   1280x800 test should just be without AA.  But I guess you do it for consistency when comparing all IGP/GPUs.


----------



## erasure (Apr 26, 2012)

i wanna know about virtu mvp test


----------



## suraswami (Apr 26, 2012)

Nice review.  Good to see integrated graphics getting better and better.


----------



## mastrdrver (Apr 26, 2012)

Why is the IB CPU overclocked and not the Llano? Wouldn't it have been better just to leave the IB CPU at stock clocks?

Just seems odd to me.

Otherwise very well done. Thanks.


----------



## hardcore_gamer (Apr 26, 2012)

I'm not impressed. I expected much higher performance since the GPU takes 1/3 of the total die area.


----------



## Mathragh (Apr 26, 2012)

mastrdrver said:


> Why is the IB CPU overclocked and not the Llano? Wouldn't it have been better just to leave the IB CPU at stock clocks?
> 
> Just seems odd to me.
> 
> Otherwise very well done. Thanks.



I'm also wondering why the ivy is clocked at 4,7GHz, while everything else is ran at stock(as far as I know).
Or it might simply be a misstype ofc.


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 26, 2012)

mastrdrver said:


> Why is the IB CPU overclocked and not the Llano? Wouldn't it have been better just to leave the IB CPU at stock clocks?



fixed. copy and pasted the specs table and forgot to change that


----------



## dj-electric (Apr 26, 2012)

Ivy bridge GPU performance - because CPU performance will end in a lot of facepalms.


----------



## OneCool (Apr 27, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> It is not my fault though.
> Both benches say Dragon Age II 1280x800 2xAA.
> Why don't you state them on the bench?
> writting more makes it harder to understand



Not to mention this was a IvyBridge setup too.

W1z 7970 review was done with this



> CPU:	Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.8 GHz
> (Bloomfield, 8192 KB Cache)
> Motherboard:	Gigabyte X58 Extreme
> Intel X58 & ICH10R
> ...


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Apr 27, 2012)

To the guy asking about why the 6670 is coming out ahead of a much more powerful card. If the whole "its at low" does help. It means the 6670 has enough power to max out the game at those settings as well as the 7970 lightening. The variance in performance can be attributed to:

miscellaneous variations in the test run
better driver optimization at settings for lower end cards
Windows 7 background tasks running that you cannot control
Pudding

Any of these could have created the very pointless and very minor anomaly. It is the nature of testing systems with hundreds of contributing variables. This is why W1zz and everyone does multiple tests across different games and why W1zz normalizes the results for the overall score.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 27, 2012)

hardcore_gamer said:


> I'm not impressed. I expected much higher performance since the GPU takes 1/3 of the total die area.



this shouldnt come to you at any surprise.

Your machine whoops IVB in Graphics capability despite the CPU not being as fast as a SB/IVB...




Dent1 said:


> Looks like the old school AMD APU is spanking Ivy Bridge. Trinity should be exciting.



No Kidding, now if AMD could get the performance numbers up to better spec than SB/IVB/E Models with the GP portion being superior it be a winner



NdMk2o1o said:


> Meh, no ones buying IB 3770K for igp, when do we get CPU review?



and with a test with and without the IHS in temperature testing

With IHS (not uncapped)
With IHS reinstalled using aftermarket Thermal compound/TIM
With IHS removed and cpu shimmed

see what thermals are and if that is infact true as to why the IVB runs hotter...


----------



## Sah7d (Apr 27, 2012)

Nice review.

Many of the reviews do not have test about temperatures why ?
It is not important ?

Some kind of reference would be nice to compare Sandy Vs Ivy in that area
becouse if you want to do OC this is an important fact.

Also there are reports about that the Ivy is hotter becouse of some thermal material
inside the die wich has been replaced to low the cost had an impact in the temperatures.

Anyway if you are already have Sandy Bridge there is no point to upgrade becouse
of the "tic toc" known cpu process with Intel.


----------



## evulmunk33 (Apr 27, 2012)

nice review!!!

i really would have liked to see a highend card in that comparison... just for fun 
just how slow is IVB compared to a 680 or 7970?

btw, did you observe any glitches? my laptops intel igp drivers are terrible, even in 2d... colors look washed out, no option to adjust it, and they seem to dynamically adjust the contrast based on what the display is showing, and i cant turn it off...

so whenever i can, i switch to the nvidia optimus graphics... even if all i do is browse the web and watch videos or read text...


----------



## Frick (Apr 27, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> It is not my fault though.
> Both benches say Dragon Age II 1280x800 2xAA.
> Why don't you state them on the bench?
> writting more makes it harder to understand



I actually agree with this. It does makes it easier even if you're reading the review anally.


----------



## Absolution (Apr 28, 2012)

Nice and balanced review, unlike the one at THG, where Intel cpu's must be at the top of each chart no matter the configuration.


----------



## phanbuey (May 5, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> It is not my fault though.
> Both benches say Dragon Age II 1280x800 2xAA.
> Why don't you state them on the bench?
> writting more makes it harder to understand



I must agree with him... "set to low quality" by itself (out of context) means nothing... his post brings up legitimate questions a new reader would have: what was the other bench set at? why are these  set to low and the others to something else? The initial, and natural, assumption is that all benches are normalized.  

This is very good constructive criticism, best course of action is to improve chart by putting settings of game clearly at the top - or to not, and use same settings for all benches. This would make everything apples to apples (because bananas are pure, misleading evil).

I know everyone will disagree with myself and the two other posterss for the sake of TPU, but as an unbiased 3rd party - those charts are misleading and are easily taken out of context. Not to mention, they are very easily fixed.  There is no reason not to improve them.


----------



## entropy13 (May 5, 2012)

phanbuey said:


> This is very good constructive criticism, best course of action is to improve chart by putting settings of game clearly at the top



None of the major review websites that feature at least 15 benchmarks puts settings at the top of each benchmark's page...because TPU is the only review website that uses that many benchmarks. In the "battle" of making each benchmark's pages even longer v. making just one page that would already specify the settings for everything, the latter won.



phanbuey said:


> or to not, and use same settings for all benches. This would make everything apples to apples (because bananas are pure, misleading evil).



I agree...if I want to see 0 fps graphs. 



phanbuey said:


> I know everyone will disagree with myself and the two other posterss for the sake of TPU, but as an unbiased 3rd party - those charts are misleading and are easily taken out of context. Not to mention, they are very easily fixed.  There is no reason not to improve them.



There's nothing misleading in those charts, it only becomes misleading if you don't read properly, and/or skip pages. Similar to how Tech Report's other graphs (frame times, frame latencies, time spent beyond 50ms) would become misleading if you don't read a certain page ("Our Testing Methods") that precedes those graphs.


----------



## Steevo (May 5, 2012)

Great review, and we apologize for the village idiot, he must have snuck in here, and he can't read.



Sah7d said:


> Nice review.
> 
> Many of the reviews do not have test about temperatures why ?
> It is not important ?
> ...




If you can afford this chip and are pushing it to the max then a water, or high end air cooler isn't an issue for you. Or you also plan on phase or other silly tests using LN or the like and will probably remove the IHS anyway.


----------

