Are there any advantages of an AMD igpu?

ZodaEX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Messages
4,893
Are there any advantages of an AMD igpu these days over Intel's igpu?
I've been reading everywhere that the encoding quality of Intel's Quick Sync is higher than AMD's equivalent, and now the new XE igpus are faster in gaming too. Is there any reason at all anymore to go with one of AMD's igpus?
 
yes, for games. yes intels encoding is still faster. the xe mobile chips seems to be close to ryzen 3000g series in games, not faster(not sure where youre seeing that), but desktop is still far behind.
 
for a test bench very handy when diagnosing parts. always nice to have a gpu you can test against. the new ryzen 5000 apus are coming but from what iv heard they still use vega graphics.
 
If you have an Intel 9 or 10-series iGPU, you have the one PC setup capable of legally playing UHD Blu-Rays. Intel dropped SGX with newer chips and previous versions were too underpowered to actually play them without skipping like crazy.
 
Only the top trims of Xe are comparable to the (old) Vega IGPU. AMD also has much more reliable driver support - since their IGPU is just a tiny version of their discrete card it is pretty much guaranteed that any game will run on an AMD APU, albeit slowly. Intel's gaming support is getting better but its still going to be spotty.
 
AMD can get more performance with 5000series IPC gains and higher memory speeds with Vega as they kept it around for a reason . It's like seeing GDDR4 video cards evolve
 
Are there any advantages of an AMD igpu these days over Intel's igpu?
I've been reading everywhere that the encoding quality of Intel's Quick Sync is higher than AMD's equivalent, and now the new XE igpus are faster in gaming too. Is there any reason at all anymore to go with one of AMD's igpus?
I can think of one. You can actually buy the intel ones.
 
I would think memory speeds .. AMD should support up to 4000Mhz and that is the speed of the igpu if it runs at 1 to 1 with a 5000 series cpu .
 
Are there any advantages of an AMD igpu these days over Intel's igpu?
I've been reading everywhere that the encoding quality of Intel's Quick Sync is higher than AMD's equivalent, and now the new XE igpus are faster in gaming too. Is there any reason at all anymore to go with one of AMD's igpus?
For H.264 encoding quality, they are pretty similar..... Which is to say....ok. At lower bitrates, They do not compare at all to Nvidia's Nvenc. However, higher bitrates, it can be tough to tell the difference. Even when comparing frame by frame.
Even h.264 is efficient enough that, if it has a reasonable amount of bitrate, its going to give solid results. its when you are really trying to save a lot of space with optimized bitrates and settings, that NVENC shines above AMD and Intel. ( This also means NVENC is much better for streaming games).


for h.265, I haven't yet done direct comparisons. But based on general experience----i would say that Intel and AMD are similar in quality, again. But still clearly behind NVENC. And actually, NVENC's H.264 quality is so good, it can give Intel and AMD's h.265 a run for their money.
However, I do have to say that Intel's internal scaler for upscaling/downscaling, is really good. and I recommend using that over software methods like Spline, Lanczos, etc. I don't know what method their scaler is based on, but its really good at retaining sharpness without artifacts. And it even keeps the linework looking clean in 2D animation.

Decoding is where Intel's XE really shines. it decodes all version of h.264, h.265, and AV1. AMD and Nvidia do not support hardware decode of all variants of HEVC/h.265. I hear XE is pretty amazing for editing video timelines, because of that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top