Originally Posted by Venomous
It's sad that this new ivy bridge gpu performance is still slower than amd's llamo, yet given so much praise.
Well, let us see it this way:
1. Video post processing algorithms on the driver side are working for all videos (tested upto 1080p60) out of the box, unlike the case with Llano where ESVP forced turn off of video processing for 1080p60 videos and also was heavily dependent on the amount of DRAM allocated to the integrated GPU. [Edit: In fact, ESVP wasn't working at all, and the post processing options had to be manually turned off for 1080p60 to work]
2. There is more open source software support for Intel's GPU (talking about QuickSync Decoder here) at launch compared to the Llano
3. 4K decode acceleration is working with the Intel GPU at launch (confirmed by Andrew @ MissingRemote) unlike even the recent 7750 (though, admittedly, the Intel system is unable to output it over HDMI, but the 7750 can)
4. Importantly, Intel's driver quality has improved (wrt Flash acceleration support, more knobs for post processing etc.) over Sandy Bridge at launch, while, in the case of AMD, the driver quality has only taken a nosedive with every successive release (for every performance improvement they put in for the gamers, one of the HTPC aspects seems to get broken).
I am no Intel fan-boy (you can clearly see that I have been very caustic on Intel in many of my reviews -- including that of the ASRock CoreHT 252B
), but given the above points, I can't but appreciate Intel for taking care of the HTPC community much better than what AMD has done.
Obviously, I hope Trinity can turn things around for AMD. But, given the recent history with AMD, my hopes aren't as I high as it was when Llano was launched.