Crysis Warhead - I7-3770K is a roughly 20% slower in puny 1366x768 at CRAP QUALITY (31.9fps vs 38.9 for GT440). The lead of the GT 440 GROWS to above 30% when you bump up the res to 1680x1050 (common 19in-22in monitor res) . Oh an note it's above 50% faster at 1366x768 when upped to PERFORMANCE QUAL (GT440 94.5fps vs. 3770K 61.9fps, a stunning defeat for a chip faster than yours vs. GT440!).
Metro 2033 brings it within 10% of the GT440 (note your chip is slower than this, so GT440 over 10% lead NOTE this is a cpu bound game, so graphics doesn't mean much - pay attention to games that separate the gpu's).
Dirt 3 (a GPU game) where the GT440 flexes it's muscles again and gets a good 50% faster no matter the res (1366v768 medium qual GT440 64.5fps vs. 46.2fps for 3770K).
Total War Shogun 2 GT440 40.8fps vs I7-3770K 21.1fps...OUCH not even playable at 1366x768. Umm, that's over 100% faster for the GT440 eh? Oh and the 3770K is even beaten by the lowly GT520 (note this people, a larger number is NOT always faster, do your homework! GT520 is 1/2 speed of the GT440 here). LOL, AMD's Lano 3870K is beating Intel's gpu by 100+% here...ROFL. AMD's chip is $120 at newegg...YOUR chip is $229. Umm...Bad decision?
"Ivy Bridge greatly improves on Sandy Bridge, but it still has quite some distance to go to catch Llano in shader-bound scenarios." So in shader bound games expect to get trounced by EVERYTHING over $50 (gpu) or a cpu that's $120 gets you double perf.
PORTAL 2 (uh oh, another gpu game...LOL) GT440 57fps vs 25.3fps for 3770K. OUT over 120% faster than Intel. This GT 440 can be had for $80 anywhere (even on amazon...LOL). Note the GT520 can be had here for under $50 and scores 30+fps. Again trounced by a $50 card, and DESTROYED by a $80 Gt440. OMG, that $120 AMD 3870 is 100% faster also scoring over 50fps!...OUCH. OH, and note Intel's drivers suck still. They encountered what they believe to be "RENDERING ERRORS" in this test. OUCH.
Battlefield 3 - Same story GT440 60% or so faster...Lano 3870k 25% faster.
Starcraft 2 - GT440 61fps vs 35fps for 3770K. INTEL TROUNCED BY GT440 in the very game you site. A good 85% faster in this game. That's high qual, drop it down to medium and GT440 almost hits 100% faster (101fps vs. 52fps).
For anyone who hasn't figured it out yet I'll yell it :)
THE GT 440 FROM NVIDIA (pick a brand) is 60%-100%+ FASTER THAN INTEL'S I7-3770K on chip GPU (that's Intel 4000 gpu to you), which is FASTER than the 3570K you're saying beats a GT440...ROFL.
Skyrim, and Civ5 area also tested by I think you get the point. Any game where it is GPU dependant will be a LOSER for Intel's on chip gpu's (any of them) vs a GT 440. You'd be better off knocking some off the price of the cpu and getting a GT440 which is FOR SURE smoking the intel gpu.
Need more evidence, try hardocp, techreport, ixbtlabs (all end in .com, don't want them stricken here just in case).
Please don't review hardware without reading ample benchmarks first. These are products that can be benchmarked and PROVEN if they are faster or not. People making statements about the performance of hardware on sites like this (amazon et al) can lead a ton of people down the wrong path. Please refrain.