And Zen 4 CPUs will be hotter and more power hungry.
Now we know why the TDP for Zen 4 is 170w vs 125w on Zen 3.
So the move to 5nm means more density but rather than adding extra cores AMD is filling the space with an iGPU
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
All Zen4 to have iGPU by design
- Thread starter Harlequin
- Start date
And Zen 4 CPUs will be hotter and more power hungry.
Now we know why the TDP for Zen 4 is 170w vs 125w on Zen 3.
So the move to 5nm means more density but rather than adding extra cores AMD is filling the space with an iGPU
There shouldn't be much difference in total power draw between a system displaying web apps on the iGPU vs dedicated card, given both are in the system at the same time. Looking online, RTX3090 uses less than 20W when idle.
You'd imagine so but the impact might be reduced if ALL cpus are apus, because that should simplify things a bit, they haven't got to make multiple versions of the same chip.
I don't recommend using an iGPU for anything - it is slow and stresses the central cores to the extent that the overall system responsiveness goes to crap.
In which alternate reality does this happen? (Asking as I have 100 Pcs at work with Intel graphics that don't seem affected)
Probably you are used to the slow speed and it doesn't bother you. But the Intel iGPU is even worse.
Well, try the iGPU on a motherboard - asrock 939a785gmh and you will understand.
Modern iGPUs are also very slow.
A 16 year old low-end motherboard as an example? Obvious troll is obvious
I'll be honest, I thought my 6th and 7th gen Intel graphics weren't particularly modern, but when you're digging up 16 year old relics as examples, then I must be near the cutting edge
asrock 939a785gmh
Thats socket 939 , using a 12 year old onboard (not ondie) dGPU. The last official and optimised driver was catalyst 13.1 in January of 2013. The only windows 10 drivers are renamed vga compliant ones to output a display only.
Thats socket 939 , using a 12 year old onboard (not ondie) dGPU. The last official and optimised driver was catalyst 13.1 in January of 2013. The only windows 10 drivers are renamed vga compliant ones to output a display only.
Intel themselves only really `got going` with ondie iGPU with Sandy Bridge in 2011, AMD then launch Llano on AM2 as its own `APU`. The last AMD aolution with onboard dGPU was the 890GX chipset for AM3, which used a slightly faster version of the HD4200 you listed (that Asrock board was from 2009)
Really?
Apologies for not realising that a random low end motherboard was made for socket 939 ~5 years after the socket had been superseded by AM2
Sadly AMD carried on with the dgpu part up till the 980G chipset for AM3 (it was only a rebadged 880G anyway), but the grahics core was the same HD4200; a serious critique at the time!
You do know that Intel has done this for the last decade?
What, every cpu made by Intel in the last decade has an IGPU?
You do know this is incorrect?
Eh? The vast majority of Intel desktop chips (not HEDT/Server) have integrated graphics.
It was only when yield started getting worse that "F" parts emerged with disabled/missing iGPU
Eh?
"Vast majority" is not equal to "all".
The X99 series and similar didn't have IGPUS as afar as I recall.
Also one of the reasons I run an X5650.
X99 was a HEDT platform - so yes it didn't have integrated graphics.
In what way does it not having an iGPU benefit you?
Benefit?
Who's talking about benefit?
I just regard it as unnecessary silicon and a waste (for me, with my current usage), hence I don't want it.
Now if someone brings out a cpu with an IGPU equivalent to a current mid-range discrete graphics card like a 3070, then colour me interested, but that's never going to happen.