3 ms·
Actually, that's not really true re: the GPUs. They're pretty roughly comparable, and trade off different specs (execution units vs clock speed) with the result
by ibrahima 13y ago
Actually, that's not really true re: the GPUs. They're pretty roughly comparable, and trade off different specs (execution units vs clock speed) with the result that the HD 4600 is actually better in some benchmarks and worse in others.
See http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4600.86106.0.html http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4600.86106.0.... and http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-5000.91978.0.html http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-5000.91978.0....
Although, that said the Surface Pro 2 actually has an HD 4400 which is definitely inferior to the HD 5000, though the difference is not that really huge (probably roughly 20% overall), which in most cases is not enough to make a difference in playability of games - if you're getting 25fps average on the HD 4400, 30fps on the HD 5000 will be noticeably better but still bad IMO, especially in high load scenarios when the framerate dips. Personally I prefer to play with over a 60fps average so that even in more intense scenes it doesn't drop to below 30fps.
And if you're not playing games, it's really not even relevant.
- wtallis 13y agoI've seen it suggested that the higher EU count of the HD 5000 allows it to be clocked lower and thus operated at a lower voltage, adding up to a net power savings for the same level of performance. I imagine this could be particularly significant at moderate GPU loads, rather than fully loading the GPU with a game.