1 2 Previous Next 27 Replies Latest reply on Sep 4, 2011 8:39 PM by razgriz

    HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison


      Comparing i5-2500k with HD3000 onboard graphics driver version with latest official driver Tested in 1280x1024 (except Mafia 2/Just Cause 2 1024x768, Final Fantasy 1280x720, Riddick 1280x960) with various game settings. Update: added



      3DMark VantageP1.734P1.751P1.752
      3DMark 06425842564264
      Doom 336,746,947,6
      Far Cry64,8169,1070,17
      Hawx 2546771
      Serious Sam HD435353
      Dirt 244,545,345,9
      Half-Life 243,4842,9143,08
      Civilization 5505050
      Anno 140432,0044,8745,58
      Far Cry 243,7444,6944,57
      Stalker Pripyat81,7585,0085,25
      Mafia 219,719,719,7
      Lost Planet 236,536,737,1
      World in Conflict414344
      Riddick Butcher Bay36,5648,8348,97
      Farming Simulator145555
      Call of Duty 241,1545,8046,15
      GTA 431,5331,8431,79
      Just Cause 228,9530,2630,68
      Final Fantasy XIV686709844
      Unreal Tournament 200462,4970,8874,01
        • 1. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison



          Could you run 3Dmark06 at 1280x800 resolution and post what score you get?

          I'm getting around 4255p with 1280x800 on MBP 13" 2011 i5



          • 2. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

            I cannot change the resolution on my Basic version of 3dmark06.

            • 3. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

              Thanks for taking notice.


              If you look at http://www.techyalert.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2010-vs-macbook-pro-2011/ you can see he's getting around 4629p in 3Dmark06.


              I'm really curious how he is getting that good score? Were there any better drivers prior to these drivers you compared?


              I have identical MBP as his.



              • 4. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                Basic resolution for 3dmark06= 1280x1024 - and that's what I have tested to get a score around 4260. To get a score of 4630 points with 1280x800 seems plausible. I can't see any anomaly in this score. Keep in mind some i5 notebook models does have a higher turbo frequency (1200-1300 Mhz) compared with my i5-2500k @1100 Mhz.

                • 5. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                  Hi Yups, could you benchmark some of the games at the "low" settings? I mean verify the claims shown here:



                  From what I am guessing, the gains are mostly limited to lower resolutions and settings.

                  • 6. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                    I cannot verify it. Low game configuration does mean 640x480, 800x600 or which resolution? I tested some of the games in lowest settings as well, but with 1280x1024 excluding Mafia 2. Dirt 2, Crysis, Battleforge Hawx 2 for example. There are performance gains in this games, obviously not as much as mentioned in their release notes for me. Different CPU and benchmarks could make a difference though. Especially the benchmarked demo/save game can differ and bring different results. To verify it you have to run the same Benchmarks with the same settings and same hardware. The resolution shouldn't make a difference as long as the GPU limited the performance which is the case in almost every game with Sandy Bridge @IGP.

                    • 7. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                      Resolution and settings could likely make the difference. It looks like the 2361 build addresses deficiencies regarding OpenGL and hardware VS/T&L. You've got a big gain in Doom 3, which is an OpenGL game for example. I've seen numerous benchmarks regarding geometry processing, the gains are usually biggest in the lowest resolutions. Anyways, its not a simple "optimization patch", it enables a particular performance feature.


                      I have a 2600K system using HD Graphics 3000, which is closer to their config, but benchmarking is not simple. I will try running but I have limited disk space.


                      -Some games are easier to verify because they have a benchmark program. From there you should be able to check Batman: Arkhan Asylym/Hawx 2, Crysis Warhead/Resident Evil 5

                      -Crysis Warhead performs better and is more optimized than Crysis. Since its an updated version of the same game, might be worth it to test it instead.



                      By the way guys, performance is also somewhat dependent on CPU. It'll be mostly GPU limited, but if you have a 2410/2415M chip, you will perform less than those with 2520M or the quad core chips. The 2410/2415M Macbook Pro 13 also seems to have lower graphics frequency as a OEM specific part than the regular ones.

                      • 8. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                        You are mostly GPU limited with a Sandy Bridge Quadcore and integrated graphics for gaming purpose. If possible I've used an integrated Benchmark. There are integrated Benchmarks or standalone Benchmarks used for Crysis, Lost Planet 2, World in Conflict, Battleforge, Dirt 2, Doom 3, Hawx 2, Stalker and Mafia 2. Far Cry 1/2 and Prey used with a Benchmark Tool and Half-Life 2 with a self-made timedemo. Yes there are big gains in OpenGL games.....not in all though. Prey for example was faster with the old driver. Quake 4 which is not on the list got a big boost similar to Doom 3.

                        • 9. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                          To add another note, the driver includes different claims on a different system. To be specific with Core i7-2920XM this time.


                          See here:



                          Low setting means 1024x768 for Intel. Far Cry 2 gained in DX10 mode a lot more than with DX9 mode. I tested Far Cry 2 in DX9 mode. All this affects the results.

                          • 10. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                            Yups, I tested 3 driver versions. The 2361 driver gives nice improvements in Quake 3 Arena and Crysis Pre-Beta, the only game benchmarks I tested. Little improvements elsewhere too.




                            Quake 3 Arena

                            -640x480 Normal: 336.8/336.6/337.6, 337.6/337.2/337.1
                            -1280x1024 High: 209.2/208.9/209.8, 207.9/209.8/209.4
                            3DMark06 Vertex Shader: 175.440Mvertices/67.767
                            Fillratetest 1.13: 12058MB/14924/17883/1537MTexels/3071
                            SiSoft Sandra Lite 2011.2.17.47 Graphics Memory Bandwidth:

                            7.72GB/15.75/3.78, 15.75GB/75.65%/5.54GB/2.58GB
                            Crysis 1024x768 Low GPU: 46.98
                            FFXIV: 134




                            Quake 3 Arena Demo
                            -640x480 Normal: 335.0/334.2/335.4, 336.9/337.7/336.5
                            -1280x1024 High: 209.8/209.2/209.3, 208.3/208.6/208.9
                            3DMark06 Vertex Shader: 176.735MVertices/67.840
                            Fillratetest 1.13: 12101MB/14922/17861/1541MTexels/3075
                            SiSoft Sandra Lite 2011.2.17.47 Graphics Memory Bandwidth:

                            7.89GB/16/3.87, 16GB/77.24%/5.76GB/2.6GB
                            Crysis 1024x768 Low GPU: 47.10
                            FFXIV: 138(+3%)



                            Quake 3 Arena Demo
                            -640x480 Normal: 381.1/383.1/384.0 = 14.3% average gain for Demo 1, 385.3/385.0/380.6 = 13.0% average gain for Demo 2
                            -1280x1024 High: 249.6/250.6/250.7 = 19.5% average gain for Demo 1, 252.5/253.7/253.0 = 21.3% average gain for Demo 2
                            3DMark06 Vertex Shader: 176.770MVertices/67.867
                            Fillratetest 1.13: 12126MB/15124/17893/1565MTexels/3067
                            SiSoft Sandra Lite 2011.2.17.47 Graphics Memory Bandwidth:

                            8GB/16.15/4, 16GB/77.62%/5.81GB/2.62GB
                            Crysis 1024x768 Low GPU: 59.49 = 26.3% gain
                            FFXIV: 142(+3%)


                            (-MB means MB/s)


                            The big gains in applications like Q3AD and Crysis Pre-Beta that doesn't have any additional patches or updates suggest that they enabled something in the hardware that wasn't there before.

                            • 11. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                              Your Crysis gain is better than mine. Regarding OpenGL it's surely the activated OpenGL 3.1 Hardware Transform and Lighting. Riddick improved from 36.56 to 48.83 which is OpenGL based.

                              • 12. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison



                                You mean Chronicles of Riddick? From the 2820QM review from Anandtech, it didn't even run it properly on the early drivers. They sure have come a long way.


                                Edit: I ran another benchmark testing geometry performance for OpenGL. I haven't posted the results because it does 100 tests or so. I've took a look at the numbers and the gains are amazing. The geometry throughput increased by 3-4x.

                                • 13. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                                  I mean Chronicles of Riddick Escape from Butcher Bay, benched with the integrated timedemo. Dark Athena is a different version, don't know how it performs. Never tried it.

                                  • 14. Re: HD3000 Driver Performance Comparison

                                    If you have the time, run Crysis comparisons with 1024x768 this time. That's what I ran at. 

                                    1 2 Previous Next