Gaming Performance: iGPU

All of our game testing results, including other resolutions, can be found in our benchmark database: www.anandtech.com/bench. All gaming tests here were run using integrated graphics, with a variation of 720p resolutions and at minimum settings.

We are using DDR5 memory for Alder Lake at the following settings:

  • DDR5-4800(B) CL40

All of AMD's Ryzen APUs were tested with DDR4 memory at the relevant JEDEC specifications of each chip.

Final Fantasy 14

IGP Final Fantasy 14 - 768p Min - Average FPS

World of Tanks

IGP World of Tanks - 768p Min - Average FPS

Borderlands 3

IGP Borderlands 3 - 360p VLow - Average FPS

Far Cry 5

IGP Far Cry 5 - 720p Low - Average FPS

Gears Tactics

IGP Gears Tactics - 720p Low - Average FPS

Grand Theft Auto V

IGP Grand Theft Auto V - 720p Low - Average FPS

Strange Brigade (DirectX 12)

IGP Strange Brigade DX12 - 720p Low - Average FPS

Performance on Intel's UHD 770 integrated graphics when compared to AMD's Ryzen APUs came solely down to the intensity of the game title. In scenarios where titles favor CPU grunt, the 12th Gen Core series processors did well, but when it came to graphical performance, UHD 770 clearly trails AMD's integrated Radeon graphics.

The consensus here is that in all scenarios, AMD's Ryzen APUs are superior to Intel for low-budget gaming systems where discrete graphics aren't used. Intel really only makes the bare minimum investment in die space for their iGPU here, and it shows: UHD 770 is good enough for the bare minimum in gaming, and that's about it.

CPU Benchmark Performance: Legacy and Web Gaming Performance: 1080p
Comments Locked

196 Comments

View All Comments

  • Otritus - Wednesday, March 30, 2022 - link

    If this was the case, Intel would only put 2 little cores and call it a day. 4 little cores takes up similar space to 1 big core, but delivers around 1.5 big cores worth of performance. In single threaded tasks (web browsing and gaming) the big cores are preferred, but in highly multi-threaded tasks the little cores are a better option to boost performance.
  • mode_13h - Wednesday, March 30, 2022 - link

    > 4 little cores takes up similar space to 1 big core,
    > but delivers around 1.5 big cores worth of performance.

    It's actually more than that. According to the SPEC2017 estimates in the original Alder Lake review, a single E-core delivers 64.5% as much int performance and 54.1% as much float performance as a P-core. All while using only 1/4th the area and 20% of the power.

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/17047/the-intel-12t...

    Intel says the correct order for assigning threads, for max performance, is:

    1. Load 1 thread on all P-cores.
    2. Load threads on all E-cores.
    3. Load an additional thread on the P-cores.

    So, that puts E-core performance at somewhere greater than the portion of a P-core that you'd get by sharing it with another thread (i.e. via hyperthreading).
  • kwohlt - Wednesday, March 30, 2022 - link

    Little Cores are not for saving energy. Not really sure where this myth originated from. A little core cluster of 4 is used instead of a P core to maximize multithreaded performance in a given die space. Lightly threaded applications benefit from P cores, where as other applications want as many threads as possible, where E cores can boost those workloads.

    8+8 being top chip is because it's the first iteration. Intel will continue massively increasing E core count with each generation.
  • mode_13h - Thursday, March 31, 2022 - link

    > Little Cores are not for saving energy. Not really sure where this myth originated from.

    Mobile, I'm sure. Intel calling them "efficiency cores" didn't help.
  • kwohlt - Sunday, April 3, 2022 - link

    "Efficiency" is a value ratio. People wrongly associate it with total power draw, rather than the ratio of performance to power draw or die space. E core clusters certainly offer more multithreaded performance given the same die space and power draw as a P core.
  • mode_13h - Monday, April 4, 2022 - link

    > "Efficiency" is a value ratio. People wrongly associate it with total power draw,

    Right, but that inference should've been obvious to Intel. I think they really showed a lack of imagination, here. Or, perhaps other motives were at play.
  • mode_13h - Thursday, March 31, 2022 - link

    Intel would've done better to user terms like latency-optimized cores and "throughput clusters". Because a single P-core will give you results with lower latency, while the corresponding 4-core tile of E-cores has higher overall throughput.
  • Mike Bruzzone - Tuesday, April 5, 2022 - link

    "latency-optimized cores and "throughput clusters". yes. mb
  • thestryker - Tuesday, March 29, 2022 - link

    Appreciate the thorough review and analysis of the benchmark results. One thing I think might be useful to add is a power consumption measurement during a gaming benchmark. While Intel's peak power consumption is quite a bit higher than AMD's I've noticed in some reviews that do power test lighter workloads Intel has been equal or better.

    I'm looking forward to seeing how the inevitable back and forth between AMD and Intel goes over the next few years.
  • lmcd - Tuesday, March 29, 2022 - link

    What I'd really like to see are benchmarks of AMD and Intel running at 65W modes (both checking that they're legit and checking performance). The small form factor community would greatly benefit.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now