This topic contains 1 reply, has 1 voice, and was last updated by 
Gwenel
11 months, 1 week ago.
-
Posts
-
Noticed something interesting; M2 are very strong in CPU powersavingmode and are consistent regardless of CPU mode, but more sensitive to events than older blitz products.
Also M2 performs pretty much identical to them on well behaved modern graphic cards, whileas on older badly behaving graphiccards M2 performs 5 times worse in full CPU mode, and 2 times worse in powersaving mode (compared to the older blitz products using the same modes).
The good definition of a well behaved graphic cards here seem to be “metal support” when it comes to Apple. (2013 and forward seem to use that) and they perform amazingly well.
In Win10 well behaved graphic cards seem to be all about not being an Intel 400. Intel graphiccards seems to be very strong in general but not that one.
Any ideas what could make the intel 400 so weak? For example the Intel 610 is a well behaved one and are exactly as strong as any good Mac (which makes great use of Intel graphiccards without any powersettings for eneither the cpu nor the gpu, and still saves battery).
Am so suprised about the Intel 400 vs 610, both seem so budget but yet 610 delivers and 400 does not.
I might add that the Intel 410 behaves almost identically in powersaving mode and in fullCPU mode, so basically its behaving as if it is stuck in powersaving mode (x5 times weaker than the others e.g Apples (Intel 4xxx 5xxx etc) or an Intel 610).
Intel website reads :
“The performance depends on the processor (different boost speed for the GPU) and the used memory.”
So I guess I need to tell you that the Intel 400 sits in a x5-Z8350 1.4 GHz, 2GB DDR2.
The Intel 610 sits in a 4gb, Intel Pentium(R) 44150 2.3 GHz.
Is here a way to e.g. increase the bus speed or something on the Intel 400? or will it forever be locked to
be x5 slower with Monkey2 han with older blitz products?
I ask becuase out of all 7 computers tried from the same era, only that the one with the 400 was different.
The others had pretty much exactly the same nice output.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.