The lies of IGP.

Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by zazzn, May 1, 2019.

  1. zazzn

    zazzn Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    145
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Is it me or do you also feel let down by AMD in terms of APUs. I mean here we are a hell of a long time after ATI was taken over and the bold claims of APU’s coming to dominate and bring AMD to glory. Ryzen is only IMO almost evenly matched to intel because of price and more cores. It’s still slower in games where clock speed is the king. It’s still overall less attractive to me if I was faced with an 8 core 16 thread intel equivalent processor only slightly more expensive.

    Why hasn’t AMD really thrown a monkey wrench in there like they Started 5-7 years ago with the APU route? The APU’s are let’s be honest turds still. Intel’s attempt is diarrhea. Both smell like shit just one is at least a solid turd and the other is just a mess.

    I expected Performace on APU’s to be matching low to mid tier standalone cards by now. I also expected crossfire would have been worked out and work seamlessly boosting existing and discrete gfx by several percent above just apples to apples and to Nvidia give AMD a home advantage.

    This would have been a one two knock out punch for AMD. Intel suddenly losing the value proposition of having a faster CPU meaning the world.

    500-700 dollar amd APU closely performs against i7’s but includes a mainstream GPU. Then add a top tier AMD GPU with crossfire to dominate Nvidia in that price range. 8/16 or 16/32 c/t

    So you now have a
    700$ win for amd
    And another 700-1000$ gpu win

    Combined best intel/Nvidia combo
    Also beats AMD/Nvidia combo again

    This doesn’t just win the gaming argument. This win for any content creator they needs to transcode or encode. Compile, or any other work a workstation or gaming pc may do.


    End rant... discuss...
     
  2. DTN107

    DTN107 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,742
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Well... you seem to got it all together with your flawless business strategy.

    Open up a chip factory and show them how easily it is done and get back to us.
     
    KarsusTG, jeffj7, notarat and 16 others like this.
  3. Pieter3dnow

    Pieter3dnow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,716
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    There simply is no market for it. It comes down to this. APU are great for the desktop but it never been a strong selling feature (hence no more FM2+ FM3 but just one AM4). The time the APU was needed is to differentiate from Intel which back then was way way to strong on the cpu front.

    You got caught up in the old AMD marketing strategy :) .

    On the laptop side it is rather important for AMD to see how well they can do on that side but there is one big drawback most if not all of them are tied down by Intel in some kind of contract for media exposure tied to them buying the chips for laptops.

    So you are partially right on your feelings on what the APU should be and maybe in the future it will/may play a stronger roll, realize that AMD does have good gpu for that purpose at the moment you can't really say it will be on their list as a top priority.
    Money from server is a way bigger chunk then what is available from laptop OEM.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2019
  4. mvmiller12

    mvmiller12 Gawd

    Messages:
    667
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    CPU-wise AMD is very competitive with Intel right now. Intel's only real advantage here is core frequency - Intel chips are usually clocked (or overclocked) well past the 4.1- or 4.2GHz that the AMD chips top out, and this is most of the "games" advantage. The IPC is actually pretty close and cost/performance is tilted heavily in AMD's favor right now.

    APU-wise, APUs are largely held back by limited die size and fast vRAM. The GPU die is shared with the CPU die on the same package, limiting how large each can be. This means there can only be a handful of GPU cores, but they do get the benefit of being able to run at a very high frequency. As far as RAM is concerned, most APU designs rely exclusively on system RAM and system RAM is notoriously slow for what GPUs do. Better APUs have some dedicate cache memory to help in this department, but it is nothing like the oodles of GDDR modern discrete graphics cards gave.

    I find the new Zen2 design interesting. I think it will allow for more robust APUs, if the demand is there for them. The CPU is essentially divorced from the GPU, but they are still on the same module and running at the same high frequency. A dedicated I/O chip deals with memory needs and the outside world. The reason I find this exciting is because it potentially allows for creative solutions, such as a HBM memory stack on the same module. This could really push APU performance forwards. I just don't know if it will be possible on a chip as small as a socket AM4 APU.
     
  5. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,174
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    agree on the zen 2 front, it's really the first time the potential for a true APU could happen, i just think cost will keep it from ever happening though.


    the biggest problem they ran into with apu's and why peoples expectations were miss placed is the fact that oem's don't want custom apu sockets, they want to be able to use 1 board and plug and play any cpu and/or memory setup on the same motherboard across their entire lineup.. if you want to see an apu done properly look at the xbox 1 or PS4 then you'll understand why APU's never really took off.. there's no way in hell an OEM's putting that much effort into a budget gaming laptop when they can just spend that money on an addon gpu. not to mention how useless it would be in the DIY market.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  6. trentchau

    trentchau [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,597
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2015
    Personally I think apus are pretty decent for what they are now. I'm sure most people who need to use them and don't need the features a dedicated card gives also probably feel they are decent. It's one of those thibgs where if it works no one is really gonna praiae you imho. The 2200 and 2400g look spiffy and are what I consider above decent.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  7. ReaperX22

    ReaperX22 Gawd

    Messages:
    719
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2013
    I take issue with this statement. 'Slightly more expensive'. I'm sorry have you seen the price of the 9900k vs an 2700x???

    In Australia at least, 2700x = sub 500 ($469 from my go-to website). The 9900k at the same store is a giant $879. For that price difference I get a decent board and fast RAM. For enthusiasts, the Ryzen 2700 is even better value (far better value) at $359.00 at least for us, from the same store. (I managed my Sigs 2600 for ~210 AUD which was great value at the time, and still is, where standard pricing has it around $245) Compared to the 8400 at the time of purchase, which was 319 (before the 9400f was announced), it made little to no sense to grab the 8400 in my case, which was my other choice/option).

    AMD are fantastic value chips, and have literally forced intels hand at providing more mainstream high-core count models to market. Yes they win out in IPC/single core performance, but the value is what makes AMD most attractive.

    APU's aren't amazing, sure, but they're really great for super low-budget builds, HTPC's, or low-power builds. They have their place, but I don't know how you expect an APU to compete with say a GTX 1060, just purely considering size constraints and laws of physics..
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2019
    otg, Master_shake_, kirbyrj and 2 others like this.
  8. N4CR

    N4CR 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,654
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Considering they can do decently at 1080p, not too far off a console, with pc open architecture I think they're doing just fine especially for the system cost.
    OP Tldr: amd sucks but Intel sucks worse therefore amd sucks.

    Edit for autocuntrekt
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2019
    10e, otg and sirmonkey1985 like this.
  9. gigaxtreme1

    gigaxtreme1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,501
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2002
    Vat to you vant for notin', a rubber biscuit?
     
    Master_shake_ and ReaperX22 like this.
  10. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    I game on them. Intel IGPs. Have for over eight years.

    For what they are, they rock- and AMD's are even better.

    Still frustrated that AMD won't put something on their higher-end consumer CPUs. I don't care if it's competitive- I just want the damn display outputs powered.
     
    otg and N4CR like this.
  11. Nobu

    Nobu 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,954
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Amd had to get a product that beat it's rival (either Intel or Nvidia) before they could really push APUs as a gaming product. They had intel more or less beat with their graphics product, but the CPU side was lacking. They did manage to beat out the lower end graphics market, but it wasn't compelling enough (especially with a mediocre cpu) to be marketed as a gaming product on it's own.

    AMD tried marketing them as entry level gaming products, with radeon 7xxx/8xxx and later r5 250, etc, crossfire as the upgrade path...but the gain from crossfire was minimal, and for a few bucks more you could get a 270 or a better Nvidia card.

    navi and zen+/zen2 should make entry level gaming more than doable on an APU, with a clear upgrade path that won't require a new CPU to take full advantage of the GPU (though it may be necessary for physics or other things).
     
  12. _mockingbird

    _mockingbird Gawd

    Messages:
    992
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2017
    To get graphics, you need fast memory memory with a lot of bandwidth.

    That's why video cards use GDDR6 or HBM2.

    The problem with integrated graphics is that it is struck using the system's slow DDR4 memory.

    Now, you could technically integrated the fast memory (for example, HBM2) directly on the processor for the integrated graphics to use, but that would make the processor expensive and demand for such products are low (i.e. Kaby Lake-G).
     
  13. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    To be clear, this is mostly only true if you care about hardware acceleration of 3D content, and at that point, you're right about the diminishing returns and market viability. Thing is, AMD should be able to do better than Intel here; either faster for the same hardware investment, or competitive with a smaller hardware investment, yet they're barely trying.
     
  14. _mockingbird

    _mockingbird Gawd

    Messages:
    992
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2017
    What that comes down to is something called Delta Color Compression

    It's explained here pretty well:

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/10325/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-and-1070-founders-edition-review/8

    NVIDIA has delta color compression that's far far ahead of what AMD has.

    That's why the Radeon VII can't even match the GeForce RTX 2080 despite the former having over twice the memory bandwidth of the latter.
     
  15. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,611
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Consoles aren’t a big enough market for you?
     
    ZodaEX and Pieter3dnow like this.
  16. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Not relevent.
     
  17. Pieter3dnow

    Pieter3dnow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,716
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Especially when they smash sales records :) Think that current PS4 is the best selling console from Sony that Sony ever made :).

    I think it is close to what zazzn means it is a small cpu big gpu and the application is games. So close enough only it is not for desktop PC. With his reasoning behind it it prolly can be a bit beefier say such a variant up to 400 maybe 500 Watt?
     
  18. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    By not relevent, I mean not relevent.

    We're not talking about consoles. We're not 'defending AMD'. We're talking about IGPs and the lack thereof.
     
  19. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,985
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    In addition to what was said, AMD made an assumption around the time they started designing Bulldozer and promoting APUs that workloads would become more parallel, and can be more easily accelerated with a GPU. Obviously this did not pan out, especially in gaming, where the workload remain heavily single thread and not easily run in parallel. In addition, discrete GPU acceleration remained the preferred solution for GPU accelerated workloads. This made APUs useful primarily in situations where total package power and cost were the primary concerns, which are laptops/tablets, low cost desktops, and consoles.

    AMD believed that software development would take a different direction than it did. They tried to predict the future and were completely off the mark. That's all there is to it.
     
  20. Pieter3dnow

    Pieter3dnow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,716
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    For all intensive purposes console(s) are PC run the same operating system can come with mouse and keyboard have "full"windows 10 functionality ?

    All of the boxes ticked on consoles , great gaming I mean no one in ever thought that you could use jaguar cores for gaming when you would have told people that when AMD launched jaguar cores based cpu it could function as a vehicle for 4K gaming?

    I could also suggest that gaming is standing still the push that AMD made with Mantle was there to show that you could gain pretty well from near direct access of the hardware to console levels and that would have serious traction so would APU.

    More or less you could say that both are needed to have a viable market for the APU to become successful on the desktop (gaming).
     
    otg, N4CR and Hakaba like this.
  21. Hakaba

    Hakaba Gawd

    Messages:
    604
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2013
    Wow, the 2200/2400G provide really decent gaming performance at 720/1080p.

    If you want dedicated GPU performance as an APU.... I would assume the Motherboard would be $700+, and CPU/GPU “APU” would be $1100+ and dwarf Threadripper in size.
     
  22. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Nope.
     
  23. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,611
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Not relevant because you think they aren't APUs (because they are...), or not relevant just because you don't want them to be?

    I could also make a very good argument that APUs have taken over the majority of growth in consumer electronics - nearly all mobile ARM-derived CPUs are APUs with pretty advanced internal graphics.

    Or are we not going to count those either? I didn't make that case because the OP seemed to want to narrow it down to just those created by AMD in the post.

    IGP isn't dead, nor is it a lie. Far, far from it. I'd say the world has pretty much pivoted over to IGP already, it's just a few holdout niches (gamers and enthusiasts being two of them) that they haven't quite been able to displace into yet.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2019
    ZodaEX likes this.
  24. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Because they're off-topic.
     
    Trimlock likes this.
  25. N4CR

    N4CR 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,654
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Apu is the future. One day they will have a true system on chip and it'll be fast enough for almost every task and we will rememeber the good old days when you could mix and match components.
     
  26. Boil

    Boil [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,349
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2015
    I also believe that APUs are the future of general consumer computing, but there will always be the power users who demand / need more powerful solutions...

    So "component computing" will not go away any time soon, but I could see a market for a powerful high-wattage APU; imagine two 8C/16T CPU chiplets, two Navi GPU chiplets, 32GB HBM2, & an I/O chip in an APU package...!
     
    N4CR likes this.
  27. N4CR

    N4CR 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,654
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    Oh yeah I'm not thinking that'll happen in the next decade or more. But it'll happen in many of our lives and while being a bit of a bummer still will also be exciting to see.

    And yes please, but 5nm, Arcturus and hbm3, a gcn free zone and some improved colour compression please ;)
    Maybe 300-400W tdp
     
    Boil likes this.
  28. defaultluser

    defaultluser [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,278
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    APUs are just integrated graphics. For the PC, they are the cheapest way to make integrated graphics work, because you waste no additional motherboard space with a chipset. And since you use the included DDR4 memory to run games, you save on dedicated memory. They keep them small, because you have finite die space available, because there's a very small demand for 3D games.

    Integrated graphics works on a cheap Intel processor because they can make just a few pieces of silicon: Intel makes GT2 integrated graphics in, 2c, 4c and 8c, and GT3 for 2c and 4c notebook processors, and they can create their entire product lineup from those FIVE chips. There's high sales (because you have only five different chips) so you sell tens of millions of each.

    Consoles use APUs in the same fashion, but they target higher performance, while still keeping the combined performance cheap enough that they can kee pthe price under $500. APUs are still the cheapest way to do things, for the exact same reasons I already mentioned. Console builder are just like Intel: they only make a couple models of APU (PS4, PS4 Pro), so they can sell tens of millions of them.

    Making a half-dozen different APUs wit h various levels of POWERFUL 3D would complicate things. You would suddenly have THIRTY different CPU models (you are now selling a few million of each, reducing profit for each), all with vastly larger die sizes than even the consoles. Also, your high performance means you'll have to supply expensive dedicated GDDR6 or HBM2, and power circuity. At that point, you might as well make it a separate GPU card.

    There's a reason why we've never been able to scale APUs falser than consoles.
     
  29. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,174
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    the one thing consoles have over standard PC/mobile APU's is that unlike on the PC side they're directly connected to all the available memory allocated to them.. if you ever look at a PCB of the xbox 1 or PS4 you can see the traces from the socket to each memory module so it's basically a giant GPU. thus apu's will never match consoles any time soon unless AMD wants to also get into the custom motherboard manufacturing and that makes zero sense in the PC market.
     
  30. SvenBent

    SvenBent 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,849
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Your logic has basics flaws
    I expected Performace on APU’s to be matching low to mid tier standalone cards by now.

    if that was the case then the low to midend cards would not be sold and thereby not produced decreasing the range to where the new lowend standalone card would again be faster than APU.
    its like saying you should never have something below average. but that just increases what the average is.
     
    GoldenTiger, 10e and IdiotInCharge like this.
  31. defaultluser

    defaultluser [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,278
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    That's exactly what onboard graphics (Intel GT2/3, AMD Raven Ridge) does. You have a single shared memory pool feeding an integrated GPU, and the local CPU. Even with cheats like Intel's eDRaM find their inspiration in console APUs (Xbox One and 360 had cache for graphics). That is how APU graphics on PC has worked for a decade.

    That only difference between a PC and console APU is that the former has the ability to add-on cards over PCIe. The current consoles have no such capability.


    There are different designs for their memory layouts, but at the high-end it's all the same: a shared memory space is a shard memory space. The APU on the Intel side of things is so deeply integrated that it's a part of the coherent L3 cache chain, which is why larger L3 cache effects the performance of the GPU side of the APU so much. If that's not the same SHARED MEMORY SPACE as console APUs, I want to know what you're smoking.

    The only difference between the PC and the consoles are the target price point, and thus size of the integrated graphics on-chip, and the additional cost of the supplied main memory. If they suddenly found a market that would justify the added cost of mass-quantities of integrated GDDR6 to be used for main memory on PC, they would have. Because there is no market, there is no product, but it's certainly not impossible that they could ship a PC APU with GDDR or HBM.

    The reason you'll never see HBM2 or GDDR6 main memory is added costs most people couldn't justify, combined with no ability to upgrade system ram. You have to throw the whole thing away and start over, exactly like a console. DDR4 is an excellent compromise on versatility capacity-per-dollar and bandwidth-per-dollar. This is why we use expansion cards if you need more GPU power than the APU can provide, because you can use whatever local memory you want.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2019
  32. Parja

    Parja [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,542
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    For any self-respecting gamer, APUs are just a terrible idea. You really don't want to couple the two most important components in your system.

    And if you're not a gamer, you don't need an APU anyway.
     
    Snowdog likes this.
  33. Algrim

    Algrim [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,407
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2016
    I don't have a lot of spare graphics cards lying around. If the GPU dies, I have at least something that will work to allow me to show a desktop. APUs are also useful if you buy a new CPU but not ready to commit to a specific GPU yet. My wife and I did this when Pascal/Polaris were on the horizon; without the iGPU we wouldn't have been able to use our computers whilst waiting for the cards we ended up buying being available.
     
  34. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Have 9900K and 1080Ti. Could have 2080Ti. Still game on Intel IGPs.

    While I get your point and read some implied playful facetioussness in your post, I will kindly point out that 'elitism' isn't helpful to the community overall :)
     
    Tsumi, SvenBent and gigaxtreme1 like this.
  35. RamonGTP

    RamonGTP [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,463
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    The concept of a high end APU is a sound one. The proof is in the consoles (PS4 Pro/Xbox One X) the implementation in PC's is the bottleneck, in particular the memory subsystem.
     
  36. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,795
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    The biggest issue is commercial application in terms of there actually being a return on investment for getting powerful IGPs for laptops and desktops to market. If it were more worthwhile, you'd see implementations like the 'G' collaboration between Intel and AMD where a GPU and HBM module are attached to the CPU on package. Perhaps an APU could be given HBM, if the product were all AMD, though you'd still want lower-latency desktop DDR for the CPU.
     
  37. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,985
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    I would like to have a good APU in a laptop for gaming when I am traveling. Ideally I would have a $500 APU laptop with Thunderbolt 3 and an external GPU I can carry in my luggage, but no Thunderbolt 3 laptop is below $800 last I checked.
     
  38. E4g1e

    E4g1e [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,055
    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    One significant exception to that:

    If there were no APU or IGP at all whatsoever, then one would definitely need a discrete graphics card or a GPU embedded onto the motherboard (many server boards are configured of the latter kind) just for that system to even work at all. And there are a lot of cheap GPUs (graphics cards) that are still in resellers' stock that are actually slower and weaker than even the lowest of APUs or IGPs that they aren't even worth buying at all for any modern system - because their memory throughput to their discrete VRAM is actually significantly lower than the slowest of today's system RAM! As a recent example, we saw a DDR4 version of the GeForce GT 1030 whose memory throughput is a paltry 16 GB/s! That's much slower than even dual-channel DDR4-2133 system RAM whose throughput is 34.1 GB/s (not to mention even Haswell-era dual-channel DDR3-1600 RAM whose throughput is 25.6 GB/s)! And even its GDDR5 variant has a memory throughput of a mere 48 GB/s - not sufficiently higher than that of system RAM to justify buying at its current street price; in that case, it is better to save up for a higher-end discrete GPU.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2019
  39. westrock2000

    westrock2000 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,960
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    It would seem if a graphics processor that fits within the real estate of processor can give the performance you are expecting, it would kind of invalidate the complex necessity of a PCI card. Why are those cards so big if you can fit it within a 0.5"x1" area that shares power and heat dissipation with a processor?

    Personally, I think the capabilities of integrated graphics are fantastic. Can display multiple 4K monitors. Can decode videos easily, and in the case of Intel, the encode capabilities are amazing (QuickSync). In fact, outside of gaming, I would be hard pressed to recommend someone get a separate video card. Additonally, it clears up a PCI slot which can be very valuable for non-gaming users. A SATA controller, 10G network, NVME to PCI, sound card or something else can go in there.

    Hell, I was surprised I could even play Heroes of The Storm and Star Craft 2 at good frame rate on my Macbook Air, which uses a low voltage processor and has limited heat dissipation.

    Recently built a home server that uses the AMD Athlon series. $50 for a decent quad core (2C/4T) CPU and integrated video. Fantastic value.
     
  40. bobzdar

    bobzdar [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,616
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    The only place apus haven't dominated are in desktop. Every other segment of computing is dominated by them - laptops (which dwarf desktops in sales), consoles, mobile (phones, tablets etc), servers, kiosks etc. They're all apus, or CPUs with igp. The only place they don't dominate is in gaming pcs or hpc, and that's by nature. The only place an igp makes sense in those areas is if it's low power or tiny size, like a nuc, and AMD has probably the best nuc solution out there, at least half of it.