Intel Core i7-4770K vs AMD A10-6800K IGP - Any good for Gaming?
Category : Reviews
Published by Marc Büchel on 06.12.13
In the past few years, Intel and AMD have spent a lot of resources in improving the performance of their integrated graphics units. Intel has been working hard to make sure their HD graphics becomes competitive with AMDs Radeon units. Today we're going to compare the HD 4600 graphics unit we find with Intels latest Core i7-4770K CPU to AMDs HD 8670D, that can be found in their A10-6800K APU. Next to the raw performance differences we also want to know if these chips can - under certain circumstances - be used for gaming.
Introduction
[pagebreak]
Test Setup
| Motherboard |
- ASUS Maximus VI Gene
- ASUS F2A85-V Pro
|
| CPU |
- Intel Core i7-4770K @ Stock (Haswell)
- AMD A10-6800K @ Stock (Richland)
|
| Graphics card
/ IGP |
- Intel HD Graphics 4600
- AMD Radeon HD 8670D
|
| Memory |
- G.Skill Ares 2133 @ DDR3-1600 9-9-9
|
| Driver |
- Intel 9.18.10.3165 (Ivy Bridge & Haswell)
- Catalyst 13.6 AMD
|
| OS |
Windows 7 x64 |
| Benchmarks & Games |
- 3DMark
- Ice Storm
- Cloud Gate
- Fire Strike
- Unigine Heaven 4.0
- Basic Preset (Fullscreen)
- Extreme Preset (Fullscreen)
- Crysis 3
- 1280 x 1024 Low Details
- 1920 x 1080 High Details
- Dirt Showdown
- 1280 x 1024 Low Details
- 1920 x 1080 High Details
- Metro Last Light
- 1280 x 1024 Low Details
- 1920 x 1080 High Details
- Sleeping Dogs
- 1280 x 1024 Low Details
- 1920 x 1080 High Details
|
| SSD |
OCZ Octane 512 GB |
| Power
Supply |
Seasonic Platinum SS-1000XP / 1000 Watt |
[pagebreak]
3DMark & Unigine Heaven 4.0
3DMark
| 3DMark Ice Storm (Total) |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
52'003 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
54'566 |
105.10 % |
| |
More is better |
| 3DMark Ice Storm (Graphics) |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
53'172 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
61'512 |
115.68 % |
| |
More is better |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate (Total) |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
7'893 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
5'918 |
74.98 % |
| |
More is better |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate (Graphics) |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
7'989 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
7'578 |
94.86 % |
| |
More is better |
| 3DMark Fire Strike (Total) |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
862 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
989 |
114.73 % |
| |
More is better |
| 3DMark Fire Strike (Graphics) |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
934 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
1'053 |
112.74 % |
| |
More is better |
Unigine Heaven 4.0
| Unigine Heaven 4.0 Basic Preset |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
576 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
582 |
101.04 % |
| |
More is better |
| Unigine Heaven 4.0 Extreme Preset |
Points |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
128 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
147 |
114.84 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Battlefield 3 & Bioshock: Infinite
Battlefield 3 - 1280 x 1024, Low Details
| Battlefield 3 - 1280 x 1024, Low Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
28.0 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
29.4 |
105.00 % |
| |
More is better |
Battlefield 3 - 1920 x 1080, High Details
| Battlefield 3 - 1920 x 1080, High Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
7.8 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
9.8 |
125.64 % |
| |
More is better |
Bioshock: Infinite - 1280 x 1024, Low Details
| Bioshock: Infinite - 1280 x 1024,
Low Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
28.15 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
40.39 |
143.48 % |
| |
More is better |
Bioshock: Infinite - 1920 x 1080, High Details
| Bioshock: Infinite - 1920 x 1080,
High Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
14.73 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
21.72 |
147.45 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Crysis 3 & Dirt Showdown
Crysis 3 - 1280 x 1024, Low Details
| Crysis 3 - 1280 x 1024, Low Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
20.8 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
25.4 |
122.12 % |
| |
More is better |
Crysis 3 - 1920 x 1080, High Details
| Crysis 3 - 1920 x 1080, High Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
2.4 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
3.0 |
125.00 % |
| |
More is better |
Dirt Showdown - 1280 x 1024, Low Details
| Dirt Showdown - 1280 x 1024, Low Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
70.70 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
80.03 |
113.20 % |
| |
More is better |
Dirt Showdown - 1920 x 1080, High Details
| Dirt Showdown - 1920 x 1080, High
Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
13.79 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
14.10 |
102.25 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Metro Last Light & Sleeping Dogs
Metro Last Light - 1280 x 1024, Low Details
| Metro Last Light - 1280 x 1024, Low Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
23.92 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
25.32 |
105.85 % |
| |
More is better |
Metro Last Light - 1920 x 1080, High Details
| Metro Last Light - 1920 x 1080, High Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
3.98 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
4.71 |
119.09 % |
| |
More is better |
Sleeping Dogs - 1280 x 1024, Low Details
| Sleeping Dogs - 1280 x 1024, Low Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
37.1 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
47.5 |
128.03 % |
| |
More is better |
Sleeping Dogs - 1920 x 1080, High Details
| Sleeping Dogs - 1920 x 1080 High
Details |
fps |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
5.9 |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
6.1 |
103.39 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Performance Index
| 1280 x 1024 - Low Details (Games) |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
119.61 % |
| |
More is better |
| 1920 x 1080 - High Resolution
(Games) |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
120.47 % |
| |
More is better |
| Overall (All Benchmarks) |
Index |
| HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell) |
100.00 % |
| Radeon HD 8670D (Richland) |
120.04 % |
| |
More is better |
[pagebreak]
Conclusion
With this article we are basically facing
two different questions. First of all we wanted to find out what performance
difference lies between Haswell and Richland regarding gaming performance.
Second we wanted to find out if todays integrated graphics units are actually
powerful enough to cope with recent games in either a low or a high preset.
First of all, let's have a look at the performance differences. We want to kick
this off by mentioning the two results where we see by how much the results
spread. Therefore relevant are 3DMark Cloud Gate, where Richland is about 25
percent slower than Haswell and Bioshock: Infinite where Richland is a very
solid 47 percent quicker than Haswell. Other than that it is rather interesting
to see, that performance differences are rather consistent no matter testing
with our high or our low preset. In case of 1280 x 1024 pixel and low detail
level we found Richland to be on average 19.61 percent quicker than Haswell and
with 1920 x 1080 pixel the average performance advantage of Richland is 20.47
percent. In other words, no surprise the average difference taken from all
results between Richland and HD 4600 is 20 percent.
After we've had a closer look at performance differences, we're now checking
whether todays integrated graphics chips are any good for actual gaming or not.
In case of our low preset (1280 x 1024 and low details) we see that all games we
tested the AMD A10-6800K with can be played using that preset. When the
framerates are somewhere between 20 to 25 percent you will experience stuttering
from time to time, since minimum framerates will be as low as 10 to 15 frame per
second. In case of Haswell the overall picture is about the same although there
is a little less margin and there will be some more stuttering than with
Richland. But basically games are playable at 1280 x 1024, but honestly, we
wouldn't enjoy it with these framerates. If there is absolutely no other option,
then we would run games under these circumstances.
As soon as we start looking at the results coming from our high preset, it
becomes clear, that todays integrated graphics chips are not powerful enough to
cope with this kind of load. The frame rates drop to 2 frames per second, which
is by far not playable anymore.
Article in English 
Artikel in Deutsch
Article en français
Articolo in italiano