intel HD 530 Benchmark - Can it run Crysis!?

[YoloSwag]

Hi guys!

 

So I've decided to do a benchmark of Crysis Warhead on an intl iGPU for those curious and to clear out some fog over the intel iGPUs. Also, because there seems to be a lack of benchmarks for low-end and entry-level graphics solutions.

 

I'm using Crysis Warhead because I haven't downloaded Crysis yet off origin

Crysis Warhead is DX10.1 if I remember correctly, whereas Crysis was DX10 (Vista days lol)

 

For the benchmark here are some specifics -

Crysis Warhead 64-bit version (not the 32-bit exe) - installed on a Samsung 850 Evo 250GB

8GB (2X4GB) G.Skill Trident Z running at 3200MHz (disabled XMP for first runs)

i5-6600K 3.5GHz

intel HD 530

 

I ran the test for the presets - Minimum, Mainstream, and Gamer at 1080p (blood was enabled, I don't know if that'll affect anything) with XMP disabled for the first runs.

I used FRAPS to bench this thing for the first 10min of the game - Benchmark started exactly when you click the start mission thing on the loading screen up to the beach area where you download the intel.

 

TL:DR -

(XMP Disabled)

Minimum - Avg: 32.879, Max: 63, Min: 19

Mainstream - Avg: 32.443, Max: 57, Min: 18

Gamer - Avg: 17.091, Max: 28, Min: 1

 

As you can see, there's barely a difference between Minimum and Mainstream presets however we see a huge dip in Min and Max for the Gamer preset.

 

XMP - The reason I had this disabled at first is because this was causing flickering in my system for most games especially CS:GO (You don't want that in CS:GO). I only did one run with XMP enabled for the Mainstream preset test. Here are the results -

 

Mainstream - Avg: 36.141, Max: 66, Min: 12

 

There is definitely an improvement to the Avg FPS and it does feel smother overall. 

It definitely can Crysis...Warhead in Minimum and Mainstream presets at 1080p

 

Thoughts and Conclusion:

I remember playing (and finishing!) Crysis and Crysis Warhead on an intel Core i3-2100 with the HD 2000 Graphics in it. I had to turn it to the lowest possible settings at 800x600 and running it in windowed mode - was getting about 15FPS there. Moving on a year or two, I grabbed a GTX 660, and that thing was really awesome playing at 60FPS with almost all the settings at max. Crysis and Crysis Warhead is still one of the better games of the past in terms of graphics. It looks a bit like Far Cry 3 because of the tropical environment, but sometimes it looks even better. Heck you could even shoot trees and they would break in this game, times have changed.

 

Now to this, I'm surprised the iGPU actually gave the ability to play some old games at 1080p especially Crysis Warhead. I do play CS:GO on this thing and it gives me around 60FPS at 1080p with these settings. I could play lots of games in this that would run cinematic frame rates at 1080p (lol). League of Legends, no problem, max 60FPS.

 

Honestly, I'm excited about AMD's upcoming APU solution and what DX12 and Vulkan will be able to do with it not just for gaming with the iGPU alone but also maybe pairing it with a discrete GPU. Just me speculating - The iGPU could work with discrete GPUs for rendering which would be nice if it were to happen. Better performance for AMD CPUs paired with AMD GPUs.

 

Do I recommend not getting a discrete GPU? - No, duh. If you really want to play the latest games you really need a good GPU. What I would say however is that it's a bit pointless to buy a low-end GPU if you already have an iGPU (unless you just want a cheap multi-monitor system for facebook or something, low-end OEMs will handle that). That isn't an upgrade. Sure, it may spit slightly better FPS but it isn't worth the money. If you just play League of Legends or something like that, you won't need a GPU for 1080p gaming at 60FPS.

 

Spend at least $100 on a second hand mid-range GPU, or a new one if you could find it. It would definitely be better.

Heck, if you really wanted to game on a budget, buy the best CPU for the system you can afford and slap a second hand card on it. You'll be upgrading that GPU anyway, rarely would some do an entire system upgrade every year.

 

To end - I hope this benchmark does clear up some misconceptions and give more information  Happy Holidays.

 

If you want to see some old games be benchmarked, just post it here. I'll test it if I have it on my Steam Library or on Origin.

 

Also. FRAPS files (benchmark data) -

Crysis Warhead 1080p XMP Disabled.zip

Crysis Warhead 1080p XMP Enabled.zip

[GDRRiley]

now lets see you bench more game. I could also but that requires wantting too 

[VagabondWraith]

How about firing up the Witcher 3 and Crysis 3.

 

I may actually test these games on 1440p on the HD 530 just for the lulz. Idk, it might not even open ? 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, VagabondWraith said:

How about firing up the Witcher 3 and Crysis 3.

 

I may actually test these games on 1440p on the HD 530 just for the lulz. Idk, it might not even open ? 

I might test it with my HD 4600 i5 4460 lol but that's less exciting I guess. Just got Crysis 3 yesterday. GPU is still packing

[Matias_Chambers]

Just now, VagabondWraith said:

How about firing up the Witcher 3 and Crysis 3.

 

I may actually test these games on 1440p on the HD 530 just for the lulz. Idk, it might not even open ? 

 

Just now, deXxterlab97 said:

I might test it with my HD 4600 i5 4460 lol but that's less exciting I guess. Just got Crysis 3 yesterday. GPU is still packing

It's so boring not having an iGPU

[A Damn Crab!]

Not a real test Crysis will run on a Playstation 3 FFS.

[Zodiark1593]

Intel's newer iGPUs are far and away from the days of old GMA. While the first gen Intel HD wasn't much faster than the GMA 4500MHD it replaced, Sandy Bridge's HD 3000 even wallops the Radeon HD 5450 (which was a several times improvement over the GMA). Ivy Bridge's HD 4000 was a particular landmark as it exceeds the performance of the PS360, in laptop form factors to boot.

 

If Intel or AMD cared to, either of them could push their own console-like devices with peripherials, custom Windows or Linux + Wine OS, and start putting pressure on the console manufacturers. GT4e (72 EU Iris Pro) in a console-type device could present an opportunity for PC gaming to become mainstream.

 

Now, try running Crysis on a Bay Trail Intel HD with a whopping 4 Excecution Units. Skyrim I can confirm runs for suitably small values of play,

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Matias_Chambers said:

 

It's so boring not having an iGPU

no need to worry for bottlenecks amirite? 

[Matias_Chambers]

Just now, deXxterlab97 said:

no need to worry for bottlenecks amirite? 

Yep I should be good to go for a while in terms of CPU power

[Zodiark1593]

1 minute ago, Matias_Chambers said:

Yep I should be good to go for a while in terms of CPU power

Problem is upgrading the iGPU requires a new CPU as well, so in fact, you are worse off than going SLI Titan XPs.

[YoloSwag]

I actually did test Witcher 3 yesterday.

 

I was getting straight out 60FPS at 1080p...in the main menu 

 

With everything on low, it was 20FPS average at 720p. Game looks nice, but I wouldn't want to ruin the experience, gonna have to wait for them new AMD Vegas.

 

To all - Intel CPUs with Iris Pro graphics will certainly run better than the HD 530. It's about the same as the old 7770 and 6850s from AMD.

And BTW, the only reason I decided to benchmark the iGPU on Crysis Warhead was because it was ranked in Tom's Hardware GPU Hierarchy the same as the GeForce 8800s. I'd say it's a bit better  My uncle had a 9800GT, I was thinking about buying it 'til I saw the chart.