Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 iGPU Beats AMD RX Vega

erek

erek

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
10,894
"Intel is taking big strides forward with its Gen11 integrated graphics architecture. Its performance-configured variant, the Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7, featured in the Core i7-1065G7 "Ice Lake" processor, is found to beat AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 iGPU, found in the Ryzen 7 2700U processor ("Raven Ridge"), by as much as 16 percent in 3DMark 11, a staggering 23 percent in 3DMark FireStrike 1080p. Notebook Check put the two iGPUs through these, and a few game tests to derive an initial verdict that Intel's iGPU has caught up with AMD's RX Vega 10. AMD has since updated its iGPU incrementally with the "Picasso" silicon, providing it with higher clock speeds and updated display and multimedia engines.

The machines tested here are the Lenovo Ideapad S540-14API for the AMD chip, and Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL with the i7-1065G7. The Iris Plus G7 packs 64 Gen11 execution units, while the Radeon RX Vega 10 has 640 stream processors based on the "Vega" architecture. Over in the gaming performance, and we see the Intel iGPU 2 percent faster than the RX Vega 10 at Bioshock Infinite at 1080p, 12 percent slower at Dota 2 Reborn 1080p, and 8 percent faster at XPlane 11.11." -TechPowerUp!/btarunr

upload_2019-10-1_7-22-52.png


upload_2019-10-1_7-24-42.png


fmSeRaiBJCuZTJeh.jpg


RD2dzgll97ImBtXR.jpg


hDDqwNSZ2GejdmMk.jpg
 
It's good to see, but I'm more excited about how this might help in Premier editing. My rendering just happens to fit in the window that Intel IGPs give a huge boost to.
 
I would like to see them step up their game on the desktop as well. Something that beats the 3400g by these same margins would be nice.
 
It is a major improvement for Intel, but let's not get too excited just yet.

For one, Notebookcheck which is where the numbers are originally is known for sometimes using old drivers (the ones downloaded from OEM website, not directly from AMD) etc., and their article does not state the driver version.
Then the particular TDP configuration of the notebook is also very important. A Thinkpad E495/E595 in dual-channel mode is probably as fast as it gets, the Ideapads have a poor reputation when it comes to thermal throttling.

If NBC's E495 review comes out with latest drivers from AMD and in dual-channel configuration, and Intel Iris Plus is still faster, then I would say that is a win for Intel.
 
So, it costs twice as much and it wins some and loses some... Color me not to impressed. I mean, good on Intel for finally taking graphics a little more serious, but theirs no reason (besides lazy/lack of competition) that they didn't do this sooner. Here's to hoping AMD comes out with something more competitive in the mobile to force Intel to stay honest.
 
Maybe this will force AMD to finally start shipping competent GPUs in its APUs. I've yet to be impressed by their integrated graphics. Yes, it's passable, but I'd like 1080p Low at 30FPS+ in modern games not 720p low at ~30FPS in most titles.
 
Eh, buying a laptop in 2019 is like choosing between being raped by a rhino or a raging horny hippo. You can either get a Swiss cheese like Intel part or buggy 4-core APU that can't do Linux for more than 15 minutes

Don't think people should be playing games on laptops but what do I know about knowing stuff?
 
KazeoHin said:
Maybe this will force AMD to finally start shipping competent GPUs in its APUs. I've yet to be impressed by their integrated graphics. Yes, it's passable, but I'd like 1080p Low at 30FPS+ in modern games not 720p low at ~30FPS in most titles.
Click to expand...
For the last ... No clue but many years, AMD has had a superior graphics apu than Intel, yet you blame them for not having something better? Intel just now is catching up, AMD has stayed on top for a long time and had considerably better graphics at very low TDP. If you need discrete GPU performance, get a laptop with a discrete GPU. This is a silly argument to make in this thread where Intel is just now able to catch up to AMD claiming AMD might finally start making something better.
 
dgz said:
Eh, buying a laptop in 2019 is like choosing between being raped by a rhino or a raging horny hippo. You can either get a Swiss cheese like Intel part or buggy 4-core APU that can't do Linux for more than 15 minutes

Don't think people should be playing games on laptops but what do I know about knowing stuff?
Click to expand...

I never get the laptop hate. Maybe 15 years ago when they were ungodly expensive and had no hardware acceleration, sure, it was stupid. These days I would happily buy a gaming laptop if I travelled a lot. The prices are low and the specs are decent.

Edit: oops! Forgot to mention that Linux support these days should always be considered. I see Linux mentioned almost daily now in tech news, so I would hope manufacturers will start to take that into consideration.

I'm surprised that AMD has so many issues considering they are said to be the front runners when it comes to open source.
 
Last edited:
Ready4Dis said:
For the last ... No clue but many years, AMD has had a superior graphics apu than Intel, yet you blame them for not having something better? Intel just now is catching up, AMD has stayed on top for a long time and had considerably better graphics at very low TDP. If you need discrete GPU performance, get a laptop with a discrete GPU. This is a silly argument to make in this thread where Intel is just now able to catch up to AMD claiming AMD might finally start making something better.
Click to expand...

Where your argument flops is the difference in company marketing. AMD goes on and on and on and on about their integrated graphics. Constantly telling us how they have these wonderful things that are AMAZING..

Yet they aren't.

Intel on the other hand says "yeah, some have integrated graphics, some don't".
 
auntjemima said:
Where your argument flops is the difference in company marketing. AMD goes on and on and on and on about their integrated graphics. Constantly telling us how they have these wonderful things that are AMAZING..

Yet they aren't.

Intel on the other hand says "yeah, some have integrated graphics, some don't".
Click to expand...
Lol, that's funny. Where your argument flops is if their graphics where that crappy why had it taken this long for Intel to catch up (not surpass)... If it was that easy to do with low TDP parts, Intel would have just smashed AMD. It's difficult to make a 15w part perform like a discrete GPU... You aren't impressed, i get it, it should be a 10w part with 2080ti+ performance. I live in reality and so far I have only been able to use AMD mobile apu graphics to even think of playing games. This release brings Intel into my options as well. If you want dGPU performance, then get a dGPU. If you want to save $ and only game low res once in a while, get an apu. Would be cool if they could offer a better apu experience, but power requirements and shared memory restrict this. If they went to 50w TDP, that's what an rx 550 uses without a CPU. With AMD well behind Intel in the laptop business you honestly think they've been sandbagging on purpose?? Realistic expectations work better than fantasy and wants.
 
lightsout said:
I would like to see them step up their game on the desktop as well. Something that beats the 3400g by these same margins would be nice.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, these miracle chips are gong to be rare as hen's teeth for the next six months (no desktop release for Ice Lake, and if it goes into anything SFF, it will be very expensive). The 32EU versions will be a lot more common, but that barely matches Vega 7.

And by that time you can buy these in more devices, we will have the Ryzen 2-powered APUs, so again Intel will be playing catchup.

You can't even buy/preorder the model yet on Lenovo's website (despite it being announced a month ago), so it's not launching until the end of the month. That doesn't bode well for supplies pf 10nm for this Christmas.
 
Last edited:
auntjemima said:
I never get the laptop hate. Maybe 15 years ago when they were ungodly expensive and had no hardware acceleration, sure, it was stupid. These days I would happily buy a gaming laptop if I travelled a lot. The prices are low and the specs are decent.

Edit: oops! Forgot to mention that Linux support these days should always be considered. I see Linux mentioned almost daily now in tech news, so I would hope manufacturers will start to take that into consideration.

I'm surprised that AMD has so many issues considering they are said to be the front runners when it comes to open source.
Click to expand...

You're right about gaming laptops. They've been kind of okayish for the last 5 years or so.

But my perspective is, I spend 95% of my gaming time playing StarCraft 2 and fast-paced sci-fi shooters. Yeah, my games require a desk/table, 120 Hz display, nice mouse, and headphones. Playing Civilization or Company of Heroes, Bridge Portal, etc. on the couch is fine but that's not what I do for fun most of the time.

I really want a new personal laptop (broke my last one a while ago) but handing over money to Intel or go back to Windows is not something I'd do right now. Good thing is I can wait a lot for the right thing to appear.

For the record, just bought a couple of 3700x and a 5700. My Linux experience with them so far hasn't been great. I knew what I was getting into and it sucks but someone has to do it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top