Is the video card discrete or integrated? Choose a processor with a powerful graphics core

19.04.2014 0 25889

There were times when a PC couldn't run a single decent game unless it had discrete video card. Today, most off-the-shelf computers and almost all laptops rely on graphics solutions integrated into central processors. And yet the discrete graphics market continues to thrive. If you don't play heavy AAA games, is a graphics card a worthwhile upgrade? To find out the answer, let's compare the performance of integrated and discrete GPUs.

AMD and Intel significantly improved quality integrated graphics. AMD's Kaveri APUs use the same powerful GCN graphics core found in their top-of-the-line Radeon series discrete graphics cards.

Intel also updated the features and capabilities of its HD-series graphics systems, which are built into fourth-generation Core processors (codenamed Haswell). They now provide broader support for Microsoft DirectX 11.1, can support multiple displays (including 4K resolution), and are compatible with most games.

To determine the benefits of a discrete graphics card, two computers were assembled. One runs on an A8-7800 Kaveri with an integrated Radeon R7 series GPU, and the other on an Intel Core i7-4670 Haswell processor with an integrated Intel HD 4600. Tests were then run with and without a discrete graphics card on board each system.

The case for discrete graphics

Behind discrete graphics says its performance. All but entry-level graphics cards have much more powerful GPUs than those integrated into processors. Moreover, a separate graphics card will provide the GPU dedicated pool of high-speed memory. An integrated GPU must be content with sharing system memory and the data bus. Typically, with a discrete card you can set the graphics settings in games higher than with integrated solutions.

There are other benefits to using discrete graphics cards. On current generation Nvidia video cards, users can use proprietary technologies Shadowplay and PhysX. ShadowPlay optimizes the use of video encoding engines built into NVIDIA GPUs for real-time game recording and streaming, with little impact on frame rates. This is a key feature of the Nvidia Shield portable gaming device.

PhysX is a proprietary physics simulation technology that makes objects in games behave more closely to reality. PhysX is not supported by all games, but can have a huge visual impact on those that are supported.

Gaming isn't the only application that benefits from discrete GPU performance. GPUs from AMD and Nvidia consist of thousands of processors that can perform multiple operations simultaneously. Any application can benefit from this parallel processing, be it image editing programs like Photoshop, data encryption, or distributed computing projects like Folding@Home or SETI@Home.

Discrete video cards can speed up the production of cryptographic currencies Bitcoins, Litecoins and others. Miners bought up the latest video cards from AMD because the Radeon architecture turned out to be more efficient than Intel processors and Nvidia video cards. Where the Intel Haswell Core i7-4770K processor is capable of processing about 93 thousand hashes per second, the AMD Radeon R9 290X does about 880 thousand hashes per second.

The argument against discrete graphics

Discrete video cards also have disadvantages, and the main one is the price. Buying a video card will cost from a couple of thousand rubles to 30 thousand or more. AMD recently announced its most powerful graphics card yet. The Radeon R9 295X2 has two Tahiti XT GPUs on one card and costs $1,500.

AMD and Intel have almost entirely phased out processors without integrated graphics (only AMD's FX series and Intel's Ivy Bridge-E chips do not), and motherboards that support these processors have integrated video output.

A discrete graphics card also adds complexity to the system. The motherboard must have a free PCIe x16 slot to install a video card. Usually the system unit has it, although some ready-made small computers may not have it, or the card may not fit inside the case. Or the power supply will not be able to support the card's requirements. All this is because PC manufacturers did not intend, or simply did not care, that the end user would be able to upgrade.

Installing a discrete video card with Intel processors may make it difficult to use technologies such as the Quick Sync video encoding engine. Quick Sync is tied to Intel integrated graphics, and installing a discrete card may disable it. Luckily, it can be reactivated.

But you have to pay for everything. An external video card will increase power consumption, generate heat, which will require a fan to remove it (some cards even have three fans), and this will increase the noise level of the system as a whole. There are also passive cooling systems, but they are only suitable for entry-level cards and are more expensive.

Let's get down to numbers

Two computers were assembled: on an AMD A8-7600 APU with a Radeon R7 iGPU on an Asus A88X-Pro motherboard, and on an Intel Core i5-4670 with an Intel HD 4600 on a Gigabyte Z87X-UD5 TH board. Both systems were equipped with 16 GB of memory, a Samsung 840 Pro SSD and a 1000-watt Silverstone power supply, and the operating system was Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit.

A series of tests were conducted, including games and content creation applications, using only integrated GPUs. Afterwards, a Radeon R9 280X video card manufactured by XFX was installed in the systems and the tests were repeated.

As you can see from the graphs, having a discrete graphics card improves performance in almost all areas, and not just in games. PCMark 8, for example, launched Home and Work versions with OpenGL support. This interface uses all available computing resources of the computer, both the central processor and the graphics. Adding a discrete graphics card increased system performance in this benchmark by 3-19% (Figure 1).

In the multi-threaded Cinebench test, the video card had little impact, but with OpenGL on a system with an Intel processor, the video card gave a performance increase of 79%, and on an AMD system - 42% (Figure 2).

Many people think that people who play simple games - Farmville, Angry Birds, etc. - will not get any benefit from discrete graphics. But adding a graphics card gave a significant performance boost in the HTML5-oriented Fishbowl benchmark. This test is limited to 60 frames per second (the refresh rate of most monitors), and this value was achieved in three of the four tests with a discrete card (Figure 3). “Casual” games are becoming more and more complex, and their demands on video cards are correspondingly increasing.

Speaking of complex games, video cards gave a noticeable boost in BioShock Infinite at a resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels (Figure 4) and the 3DMark Fire Strike synthetic gaming test.

There's one area where adding a discrete video adapter didn't have a significant impact: video playback. There was very little CPU impact when running both YouTube (HTML5) videos and H.264 files in an MKV container.

Conclusion: Almost every desktop PC user can benefit from a graphics card. They will be useful not only to gamers, although, naturally, they receive the main benefit.

P.S. If you have any problems with your equipment, contact our computer service, or order a visit

Intel processors, like their competitors, have integrated (built-in) graphics. It allows you to avoid buying an expensive video card if you don’t need it. Also, integrated graphics in the processor is useful in laptops, as it allows you to save battery power by using these graphics only in powerful applications. The rest of the time the graphics core of the processor is blown away.

Introduction

The choice of integrated graphics is given special attention in 2 cases:

• you are not going to buy a separate adapter since you do not need high performance for your desktop PC

Basically, it is these two situations that make people pay special attention to integrated graphics.

Here, as in our other articles, chips produced before 2010 will not be considered. This means we will only touch on Intel HD Graphics, Iris Graphics and Iris Pro Graphics

The question of installing integrated graphics in powerful gaming processors remains unclear, because they are used only in conjunction with a powerful video card, which even the most powerful integrated graphics cannot hold a candle to. Most likely, this is due to the high cost of rebuilding the processor assembly line, because the cores of many chips are identical and they are assembled almost identically, and no one is going to change the assembly for the sake of a couple of models. But in this case, we would get greater performance due to the fact that more transistors would work on the processor, but the price in this case would rise.

Everyone knows that AMD's integrated graphics are more powerful than Intel's. Most likely this is due to the fact that they previously thought about creating hybrid “stones” (with a video core). If you want to know about the markings and lines of all AMD graphics (including built-in), then you, and a similar article about, is also available at the link.

Interesting fact: the PS4 has processor-integrated graphics, rather than a separate graphics chip.

Classification

A mistake that many people make is that integrated graphics does not necessarily mean the graphics core built into the processor. Integrated graphics are graphics that are built into the motherboard or processor.

Thus, integrated graphics are divided into:

• Shared Memory Graphics – These graphics are built into the processor and use RAM instead of separate video memory. These chips feature low power consumption, heat dissipation and cost, but 3D performance cannot be matched by other solutions.
• Discrete graphics - the hardware is a separate chip on the motherboard. Has separate memory and is generally faster than the previous type.
• Hybrid graphics are a combination of the two previous types.

Now it is clear that Intel chips use shared memory graphics.

Generations

Intel HD Graphics first appeared in Westmere processors (but there was integrated graphics before that).

To determine the performance of a video processor, each generation must be considered separately. The best way to determine performance is to look at the number of execution units and their frequency.

This is how things stand with graphics generations:

Generations of integrated graphics by numbers

№	Microarchitectures	Regular models	Powerful models
5	Westmere	HD*
6	Sandy Bridge	HD* /2000/3000
7	Ivy Bridge	HD*/2500/4000
7	Haswell/Bay Trail	HD* /4200-5000	Iris* 5100/Iris Pro* 5200
8	Broadwell/Braswell/Cherry Trail	HD* /5300-6000	Iris* 6100/Iris Pro* 6200
9	Skylake/Braswell/Cherry Trail	HD* 510-530/40x	Iris* 540/50/Iris Pro* 580

Where Graphics is replaced with *.

If you are interested in learning about the microarchitectures themselves, then you can look at this.

The letter P means that we are talking about a Xeon processor (server chips).

Every generation before Skylake has an HD Graphics model, but these models are different from each other. After Westmere, HD Graphics is installed only in Pentium and Celeron. And it is worth distinguishing separately HD Graphics in mobile processors Atom, Celeron, Pentium, which are built on mobile microarchitecture.

Until recently, only identical HD Graphics models corresponding to different microarchitectures were used in mobile architectures. Graphics of different generations differ in performance, and this generation is usually indicated in brackets, for example Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail). Now, with the release of the new 8th generation of integrated graphics, they will also differ. This is how HD Graphics 400 and 405 differ in performance.

Within one generation, productivity increases with increasing numbers, which is logical.

With the Haswell generation, slightly different chip markings began to apply.

New marking with Haswell

First digit:

• 4 – Haswell
• 5 – Broadwell

But there are exceptions to this rule, and in a few lines below we will explain everything.

The remaining numbers have the following meaning:

* - means that the thousands place is increased by one

The GT3e features additional eDRAM cache, which increases memory speed.

But with the Skylake generation, the classification has changed again. The distribution of models by performance can be seen in one of the previous tables.

Relationship between processor markings and integrated graphics

These are the letters that mark processors with built-in graphics features:

• P – means disabled video core
• C – enhanced integrated graphics for LGA
• R – enhanced integrated graphics for BGA (nettops)
• H – enhanced integrated graphics in mobile processors (Iris Pro)

How to compare video chips

Comparing them by eye is quite difficult, so we recommend that you take a look at this, where you can see information about all integrated Intel solutions, and where you can see the performance rating of video adapters and their results in benchmarks. To find out what graphics are available on the processor you need, go to the Intel website, search for your processor using the filters, and then look in the “Graphics built into the processor” column.

Conclusion

We hope that this material helped you understand integrated graphics, especially from Intel, and will also help you in choosing a processor for your computer. If you have any questions, first look at the instructions in the “Introduction” section, and if you still have questions, then you are welcome to comment!

Good day, friends.

The topic of our conversation today will be the graphics core in the processor - what it is and when it is used. The article is especially relevant for those who are choosing between an integrated and discrete video card or are simply concerned about image quality.

Explanation of the concept

There was already an article on my blog about what it is. But don't confuse those kernels with these ones. Now we will talk about graphics. It is not built into everyone. This is just their variety.

I'll try to explain it as simply as possible.

These devices simultaneously perform the functions of a processor, that is, they process all computing tasks, and a video card, which is responsible for playing images on your monitor.

You may also find this chip referred to as IGP. This is an abbreviation for “Integrated Graphics Processor”, that is, “integrated graphics processor”.

Why do they combine the processor with the video card inside?

In order to:

• Reduce energy consumption of hardware, not only because low-power devices consume less energy themselves, but they also require poor cooling;
• Make the hardware more compact;
• Reduce PC cost.

By the way, when manufacturers were just starting to practice combining devices, they built the graphics core directly into the .

Integrated graphics core in the motherboard

Now it is more popular to combine them with central processors in order to relieve the motherboard as much as possible. In addition, due to reduction, it is now possible to make devices of the same size, but with greater power.

Minuses

Let's consider the points mentioned above as advantages of graphics cores. Now I’ll tell you about the shortcomings.

The best in terms of image quality displayed on the screen are discrete ones, since they are independent devices created specifically for this purpose.

In turn, embedded kernels do not have such native resources. In particular, they do not use their own separate RAM, but a shared one. They also share one data bus with the processor. This naturally slows down the performance of the entire computer because it slows down the CPU.

Where are graphics cores used?

Considering the pros and cons described above, integrated controllers are often used in laptops and inexpensive desktop computers. This solution is perfect for office PCs where high quality graphics and accelerated performance are not required.

But for connoisseurs of high-quality pictures and powerful, realistic games, it is still better to buy discrete models. They have their own RAM, cooling system and data bus, so they can afford to be much more powerful than integrated ones.

Note

I want to warn you that if you want to increase the performance of your chip with a built-in graphics core by purchasing an external video card, you will be wasting your money. Either one or the other will work.

True, there are exceptions - laptops with two video devices. The main one is usually some kind of Intel HD model, and when it fails, a more powerful device from AMD or NVidia helps it. This solution allows you to simultaneously enjoy high-quality graphics and reduce power consumption, as the powerful device rests while surfing the Internet or working with office programs.

Subscribe to updates so as not to miss new useful information.

3 Great processor for gaming 4 Best price 5

Computers have entered our lives so tightly that we already consider them something elementary. But their structure cannot be called simple. Motherboard, processor, RAM, hard drives: all these are integral parts of the computer. You can’t throw away this or that detail, because they are all important. But the most important role is played by the processor. It’s not for nothing that they call it “central”.

The role of the CPU is simply enormous. It is responsible for all calculations, which means it depends on it how quickly you will complete your tasks. This could be surfing the web, composing a document in a word processor, editing photos, moving files and much, much more. Even in games and 3D modeling, where the main load falls on the shoulders of the graphics accelerator, the central processor plays a huge role, and with the wrong “stone” the performance of even the most powerful video card will not be fully realized.

At the moment, there are only two major processor manufacturers in the consumer market: AMD and Intel. We will talk about them in the traditional ranking.

The best inexpensive processors: budget up to 5000 rubles.

4 Intel Celeron G3900 Skylake

The most affordable Intel processor
Country: USA
Average price: 4,381 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.5

The rating opens with an extremely weak processor from the Celeron line. The G3900 model has two cores of the previous generation - Skylake, which, coupled with a frequency of 2.8 GHz, gives the lowest performance result. In synthetic tests, the processor shows a result that is approximately half that of the Core i3. But the price here is quite affordable - 4-4.5 thousand rubles. This means that this processor is perfect for assembling, for example, a simple office computer or a multimedia system for the living room. Overall, this model cannot be called bad. Still, the 14 nm process technology provides good energy efficiency, and the HD Graphics 510 graphics core is suitable for casual games.

Advantages:

• Lowest price in class
• Perfect for office PC or HTPC

Flaws:

• Does not support Hyper-Threading technology

3 AMD Athlon X4 845 Carrizo

Best price
A country:
Average price: 3,070 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.5

The processors of the Athlon line belong to the budget class, which is clearly evident from the cost of the bronze medalist. But for a little over three thousand rubles you will get a very interesting stone. There are 4 cores (2 logical cores for each physical) made using a 28 nm process technology. Thanks to this, power consumption is low, and heat dissipation is quite low for AMD - only 65 W. True, you don’t have to be particularly happy about this because the multiplier is locked - you won’t be able to overclock the processor. Another disadvantage is the lack of a built-in graphics core, which means that when assembling an office PC or multimedia system you will have to separately purchase a video card.

Advantages:

• Lowest price in class
• Great performance for the price

Flaws:

• Lack of built-in graphics core
• Unlocked multiplier

2 AMD FX-6300 Vishera

The only 6-core processor in its class
A country: USA (Produced in Malaysia, China)
Average price: 4,160 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.6

AMD's FX-6300 is the only processor in the category with six cores. Unfortunately, you can’t hope for high power in the budget class - the model is based on the 2012 Vishera core. In normal mode, the cores operate at a frequency of 3.5 GHz, but, like many AMD CPUs, it overclocks well. Yes, judging by user reviews, the performance is sufficient even for games, but there are still a lot of disadvantages.

One of the main ones is high energy consumption. Due to the use of inexpensive 32 nm process technology, AMD gets very hot and consumes a lot of electricity. We also note the lack of support for modern DDR4 RAM. Because of this, the processor can be recommended not for building a new PC, but for updating an old one without replacing the motherboard and other components.

Advantages:

• 6 cores. Perfect for performing several simple tasks at the same time.
• Good overclocking potential
• Low cost

Flaws:

• Poor energy efficiency
• Aging platform

At the moment there are only two players in the processor market - Intel and AMD. But this doesn’t make the choice any easier. To make the decision to purchase a CPU from one manufacturer or another easier, we have highlighted for you several main pros and cons of the products of these companies.

Company	pros	Minuses
	Programs and games are better optimized for Intel Lower power consumption Performance tends to be slightly better Higher cache frequencies	Work effectively with no more than two resource-intensive tasks Higher cost When the line of processors changes, the socket also changes, which means the upgrade is more complicated
	Lower cost Better price/performance ratio Work better with 3-4 resource-intensive tasks (better multitasking) Most processors overclock well	Higher power consumption and temperatures (not entirely true of recent Ryzen processors) Worse program optimization

1 Intel Pentium G4600 Kaby Lake

Better performance
Country: USA
Average price: 7,450 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.7

We can recommend the good old Pentium for purchase in this category. This processor, like previous participants, is made using a 14 nm process technology, LGA1151 socket. Belongs to one of the latest generations - Kaby Lake. There are, of course, only 2 cores. They operate at a frequency of 3.6 GHz, which causes the lag behind the Core i3 by about 18-20%. But this is not much, because the price difference is twofold! In addition to the core frequency, the relatively low power is due to the small size of the L3 cache - 3071 KB.

In addition to the excellent price-performance ratio, the advantages of this CPU include the presence of a built-in Intel HD Graphics 630 graphics core, which is more than enough for comfortable use of a PC without a discrete video card.

Advantages:

• Great price for this performance
• Generation Kaby Lake
• Good integrated graphics core

The best mid-class processors: budget up to 20,000 rubles.

5 Intel Core i3-7320 Kaby Lake

The most affordable processor with integrated graphics
Country: USA
Average price: 12,340 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.6

Let's open the rating with the most affordable processor in the i-core line. It is extremely difficult to call the model excellent in terms of price/quality ratio, because the cheaper Ryzen 3 even shows slightly better results in synthetic tests. However, the model that opens the TOP 5 can be safely chosen not only for an office system, but also for a gaming computer.

There are only two physical cores, but these are modern 14 nm chips from one of the latest generations - Kaby lake. Frequency - 4100 MHz. This is a very shameful indicator. In addition, there is the possibility of overclocking. Considering the excellent energy efficiency and low heat generation - even with the supplied cooler, the temperature remains at 35-40 degrees when idle, and up to 70 degrees under load - you can safely increase the frequencies. Unlike competitors from AMD, the Core i3 has a built-in graphics core, which allows it to be used in an office system without a discrete graphics card. But keep in mind that officially it only works on Windows 10

Advantages:

• Built-in graphics core
• Overclocking capability
• Low temperatures

Flaws:

• Poor performance for the price

4 AMD Ryzen 3 1200 Summit Ridge

Best price
A country: USA (Produced in Malaysia, China)
Average price: 6,917 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.7

Ryzen 3 is a low-cost new line of AMD processors, designed to once again impose a fight on Intel. And the 1200 does the job perfectly. For 7 thousand rubles, the buyer receives a 4-core processor. Factory frequencies are low - only 3.1 GHz (in high performance mode 3.4 GHz), but the multiplier is unlocked, which means enthusiasts can easily make the “stone” a little faster.

The transition to new chips not only improved performance, but also reduced power consumption, and also reduced temperatures to acceptable values. Due to the lack of a built-in graphics chip, we can only recommend this processor for budget gaming builds. Productivity is only slightly higher than the previous participant.

Advantages:

• Unlocked multiplier

Flaws:

• No built-in graphics chip

3 Intel Core i5-7600K Kaby Lake

Great processor for gaming
Country: USA
Average price: 19,084 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.7

Let's start with the fact that the i5-7600K is by no means an outsider. Yes, in terms of performance it is somewhat worse than the mastodons that you will see below, but for most gamers it will be enough. The processor has four Kaby Lake cores operating at 3.8 GHz (in reality up to 4.0 GHz with TurboBoost). There is also a built-in graphics core - HD Graphics 630, which means you can play even demanding games at minimum settings. With a normal video card (for example, GTX 1060), the processor reveals itself completely. In most games with FullHD resolution (most gamers have these monitors) and high graphics settings, the frame rate rarely drops below 60 fps. Is anything else needed?

Advantages:

• Best price
• Enough power for most gamers
• Excellent graphics core

2 AMD Ryzen 5 1600 Summit Ridge

Best price/performance ratio
A country: USA (Produced in Malaysia, China)
Average price: 11,970 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.8

The second line of the TOP 5 mid-level processors is occupied by one of the best processors in terms of price/performance ratio. With an average cost of only 12,000 rubles, in synthetic tests Ryzen 5 is able to compete with the well-known Intel Core i7-7700K at standard settings (PassMark 12270 and 12050 points, respectively). This power is due to the presence of six Summit Ridge physical cores, made using a 12 nm process technology. The clock frequency is not a record - 3.6 GHz. Overclocking is possible, but in reviews users claim that at frequencies above 4.0-4.1 GHz the processor behaves unstable and gets very hot. With factory settings, idle temperatures remain at 42-46 degrees, in games 53-57 when using a standard cooler.

Also, high performance is due to large cache volumes at all levels. The CPU supports the modern DDR4-2667 standard, which allows you to create excellent computers based on this processor for gaming at medium-high settings in FullHD.

Advantages:

• Excellent price/performance ratio
• Heats up a little

Flaws:

• Low overclocking potential

1 AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Summit Ridge

The most powerful processor in its class
A country: USA (Manufactured in Malaysia, China, China)
Average price: 17,100 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.8

As expected, the processor from the top-line Ryzen 7 has the best performance in its class. Once again we cannot help but remember the cost - for 17 thousand rubles we get power at the level of the top-end Core i7 of previous years. The processor includes eight cores, divided into two clusters. The standard clock speed is only 3.0 GHz, Ryzen 7 is guaranteed to overclock to 3.7, and with a little luck, up to 4.1 GHz.

Like previous representatives of the line, the leader is made using a 12 nm process technology, which allows for economical energy consumption. The situation with heat dissipation is good - in stress tests, temperatures remain at 70-75 degrees.

Advantages:

• High performance
• There is an overclocking option
• A fresh platform that will be supported for at least 4 years

The best top processors

3 Intel Core i7-7700K Kaby Lake

The most popular top processor
Average price: 29,060 ₽
Rating (2019): 4.6

More recently, the i7-7700K was the top processor in the Intel lineup. But technology is developing extremely quickly, and in 2018 it is difficult to recommend this particular chip for purchase. According to synthetic tests, the model clearly lags behind its competitors - in PassMark the CPU scores only 12 thousand points, which is comparable to modern mid-level processors. But these indicators are achieved on standard settings, when 4 physical cores operate at a frequency of 4.2 GHz, but the CPU can be easily overclocked to even higher frequencies, thereby increasing performance.

Yes, the bronze medalist lags behind its competitors, but it costs at least half as much, and given its popularity, it is quite possible to find a good used processor. Also, the high prevalence and long-standing presence on the market allows you to find an affordable motherboard with the LGA1151 socket. In general, we have an excellent basis for a powerful gaming system at a relatively low cost.

Advantages:

• Good price for this class
• High performance
• Great overclocking capabilities
• High popularity

Flaws:

• Not entirely relevant in 2018

2 Intel Core i9-7900X Skylake

The most powerful processor in the Intel line
Country: USA
Average price: 77,370 RUR
Rating (2019): 4.7

Until recently, Intel's top line was the Core i7 series. But modern realities require more and more power. If you are not familiar with solutions, pay attention to the Core i9-7900X. The processor, already at a standard clock frequency, is capable of entering the TOP 10 most powerful CPUs. For example, in PassMark the model scores almost 22 thousand points - this is twice as many as the bronze medalist of the rating. At the same time, in reviews, users talk about trouble-free overclocking to 4.2-4.5 GHz with high-quality air cooling. Temperatures do not exceed 70 degrees under load.

Such high performance is due to the use of 10 cores made using a 14 nm process technology. The model supports all the necessary modern standards and commands, which allows it to be used for any task.

Advantages:

• Highest performance
• Excellent overclocking potential
• Acceptable temperatures

Flaws:

• Very high cost
• No solder under the cap.

1 AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

The leader of the rating is crazy in everything - from the price of 65 thousand rubles to the incredible performance. In terms of power in synthetic tests, the model is slightly ahead of the previous participant. The internal structure is significantly different. Threadripper uses 16 (!) cores. The clock speed is comparable to the Core i9 - 3400 MHz - but the overclocking capabilities are more modest. The “stone” operates stably at a frequency of 3.9 GHz; as rates increase, the necessary stability is lost.

Such a large number of cores performs well in all tasks. But using a monster for games is not entirely reasonable - not all projects can unleash its potential. AMD will be useful for professional video editors, 3D designers, etc. - in professional software, an increase in cores gives a noticeable increase in rendering speed.

Advantages:

• Relatively low price tag
• High power
• Excellent performance in professional programs

« Why is this integration needed? Give us more cores, megahertz and cache!“- the average computer user asks and exclaims. Indeed, when a computer uses a discrete video card, there is no need for integrated graphics. I admit, I lied about the fact that today a central processor without built-in video is harder to find than with it. There are such platforms - LGA2011-v3 for Intel chips and AM3+ for AMD “stones”. In both cases, we are talking about top solutions, and you have to pay for them. Mainstream platforms, such as Intel LGA1151/1150 and AMD FM2+, are universally equipped with processors with integrated graphics. Yes, “built-in” is indispensable in laptops. If only because in 2D mode, mobile computers last longer on battery power. On desktops, integrated video is useful in office builds and so-called HTPCs. Firstly, we save on components. Secondly, we again save on energy consumption. However, recently AMD and Intel are seriously talking about the fact that their integrated graphics are graphics for all graphics! Also suitable for gaming. This is what we will check.

We play modern games on the graphics built into the processor

300% increase

In-processor graphics (iGPU) first appeared in Intel Clarkdale solutions (first generation Core architecture) in 2010. It is integrated into the processor. An important amendment, since the very concept of “embedded video” was formed much earlier. Intel did it back in 1999 with the release of the 810 chipset for Pentium II/III. At Clarkdale, integrated HD Graphics video was implemented as a separate chip located under the heat-distributing cover of the processor. The graphics were produced according to the old 45-nanometer technical process at that time, the main computing part was produced according to 32-nanometer standards. The first Intel solutions in which the HD Graphics unit “settled” along with other components on one chip were Sandy Bridge processors.

Intel Clarkdale - the first processor with integrated graphics

Since then, on-chip graphics for mainstream LGA115* platforms has become the de facto standard. Generations Ivy Bridge, Haswell, Broadwell, Skylake - all have integrated video.

Graphics integrated into the processor appeared 6 years ago

In contrast to the computing part, “embeddedness” in Intel solutions is progressing noticeably. HD Graphics 3000 in Sandy Bridge K-series desktop processors has 12 execution units. HD Graphics 4000 in Ivy Bridge has 16; HD Graphics 4600 in Haswell has 20, HD Graphics 530 in Skylake has 25. The frequencies of both the GPU itself and RAM are constantly increasing. As a result, the performance of embedded video increased by 3-4 times over four years! But there is also a much more powerful series of “embedded” Iris Pro, which are used in certain Intel processors. 300% interest over four generations is not 5% per year.

Intel Integrated Graphics Performance

In-processor graphics is one segment where Intel has to keep up with AMD. In most cases, the Reds' decisions are faster. There is nothing surprising in this, because AMD develops powerful gaming video cards. So the integrated graphics of desktop processors use the same architecture and the same developments: GCN (Graphics Core Next) and 28 nanometers.

AMD hybrid chips debuted in 2011. The Llano family of chips was the first to combine integrated graphics and computing on a single chip. AMD marketers realized that it would not be possible to compete with Intel on its terms, so they introduced the term APU (Accelerated Processing Unit, processor with a video accelerator), although the idea had been hatched by the Reds since 2006. After Llano, three more generations of “hybrids” came out: Trinity, Richland and Kaveri (Godavari). As I already said, in modern chips the integrated video is architecturally no different from the graphics used in Radeon discrete 3D accelerators. As a result, in 2015-2016 chips, half of the transistor budget is spent on iGPUs.

Modern integrated graphics take up half the usable CPU space

The most interesting thing is that the development of APUs influenced the future... of game consoles. So the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One use an AMD Jaguar chip - eight-core, with graphics based on GCN architecture. Below is a table with characteristics. The Radeon R7 is the most powerful integrated video the Reds have to date. The block is used in AMD A10 hybrid processors. Radeon R7 360 is an entry-level discrete video card, which, according to my recommendations, can be considered a gaming card in 2016. As you can see, the modern “integration” in terms of characteristics is not much inferior to the Low-end adapter. It cannot be said that the graphics of game consoles have outstanding characteristics.

The very appearance of processors with integrated graphics in many cases puts an end to the need to buy an entry-level discrete adapter. However, today integrated video from AMD and Intel is encroaching on the sacred - the gaming segment. For example, in nature there is a quad-core Core i7-6770HQ (2.6/3.5 GHz) processor based on the Skylake architecture. It uses integrated Iris Pro 580 graphics and 128 MB of eDRAM memory as a fourth-level cache. The integrated video has 72 execution units operating at a frequency of 950 MHz. This is more powerful than the Iris Pro 6200 graphics, which uses 48 actuators. As a result, the Iris Pro 580 turns out to be faster than such discrete video cards as the Radeon R7 360 and GeForce GTX 750, and also in some cases imposes competition on the GeForce GTX 750 Ti and Radeon R7 370. What else will happen when AMD switches its APUs to 16-nanometer technical process, and both manufacturers will eventually begin to use HBM/HMC memory together with integrated graphics.

Intel Skull Canyon - a compact computer with the most powerful integrated graphics

Testing

To test modern integrated graphics, I took four processors: two each from AMD and Intel. All chips are equipped with different iGPUs. So, AMD A8 (plus A10-7700K) hybrids have Radeon R7 video with 384 unified processors. The older series - A10 - has 128 more blocks. The flagship also has a higher frequency. There is also the A6 series - its graphics potential is completely sad, since it uses the “built-in” Radeon R5 with 256 unified processors. I did not consider it for games in Full HD.

AMD A10 and Intel Broadwell processors have the most powerful integrated graphics

As for Intel products, the most popular Skylake Core i3/i5/i7 chips for the LGA1151 platform use the HD Graphics 530 module. As I already said, it contains 25 actuators: 5 more than the HD Graphics 4600 (Haswell), but 23 less than the Iris Pro 6200 (Broadwell). The test used the youngest quad-core processor - Core i5-6400.

	AMD A8-7670K	AMD A10-7890K	Intel Core i5-6400 (review)	Intel Core i5-5675C (review)
Technical process	28 nm	28 nm	14 nm	14 nm
Generation	Kaveri (Godavari)	Kaveri (Godavari)	Skylake	Broadwell
Platform	FM2+	FM2+	LGA1151	LGA1150
Number of cores/threads	4/4	4/4	4/4	4/4
Clock frequency	3.6 (3.9) GHz	4.1 (4.3) GHz	2.7 (3.3) GHz	3.1 (3.6) GHz
Level 3 cache	No	No	6 MB	4 MB
Integrated Graphics	Radeon R7, 757 MHz	Radeon R7, 866 MHz	HD Graphics 530, 950 MHz	Iris Pro 6200, 1100 MHz
Memory controller	DDR3-2133, dual channel	DDR3-2133, dual channel	DDR4-2133, DDR3L-1333/1600 dual channel	DDR3-1600, dual channel
TDP level	95 W	95 W	65 W	65 W
Price	7000 rub.	11,500 rub.	13,000 rub.	20,000 rub.
Buy

Below are the configurations of all test benches. When it comes to integrated video performance, it is necessary to pay due attention to the choice of RAM, since it also determines how many FPS the integrated graphics will show in the end. In my case, DDR3/DDR4 kits were used, operating at an effective frequency of 2400 MHz.

Test benches
№1:	№2:	№3:	№4:
Processors: AMD A8-7670K, AMD A10-7890K;	Processor: Intel Core i5-6400;	Processor: Intel Core i5-5675C;	Processor: AMD FX-4300;
			Motherboard: ASUS 970 PRO GAMING/AURA;
		RAM: DDR3-2400 (11-13-13-35), 2x 8 GB.	Video card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti;
			RAM: DDR3-1866 (11-13-13-35), 2x 8 GB.
Motherboard: ASUS CROSSBLADE Ranger;	Motherboard: ASUS Z170 PRO GAMING;	Motherboard: ASRock Z97 Fatal1ty Performance;
RAM: DDR3-2400 (11-13-13-35), 2x 8 GB.	RAM: DDR4-2400 (14-14-14-36), 2x 8 GB.	RAM: DDR3-2400 (11-13-13-35), 2x 8 GB.
Motherboard: ASUS CROSSBLADE Ranger;	Motherboard: ASUS Z170 PRO GAMING;
RAM: DDR3-2400 (11-13-13-35), 2x 8 GB.	RAM: DDR4-2400 (14-14-14-36), 2x 8 GB.
Motherboard: ASUS CROSSBLADE Ranger;
RAM: DDR3-2400 (11-13-13-35), 2x 8 GB.
Operating system: Windows 10 Pro x64;
Peripherals: LG 31MU97 monitor;
AMD Driver: 16.4.1 Hotfix;
Intel Driver: 15.40.64.4404;
NVIDIA Driver: 364.72.

RAM support for AMD Kaveri processors

Such sets were chosen for a reason. According to official data, the built-in memory controller of Kaveri processors works with DDR3-2133 memory, however, motherboards based on the A88X chipset (due to an additional divider) also support DDR3-2400. Intel chips, coupled with the flagship Z170/Z97 Express logic, also interact with faster memory; there are noticeably more presets in the BIOS. As for the test bench, for the LGA1151 platform we used a dual-channel Kingston Savage HX428C14SB2K2/16 kit, which overclocked to 3000 MHz without any problems. Other systems used ADATA AX3U2400W8G11-DGV memory.

Selecting RAM

A little experiment. In the case of Core i3/i5/i7 processors for the LGA1151 platform, using faster memory to accelerate graphics is not always rational. For example, for the Core i5-6400 (HD Graphics 530), changing the DDR4-2400 MHz kit to DDR4-3000 in Bioshock Infinite gave only 1.3 FPS. That is, with the graphics quality settings I set, performance was limited precisely by the graphics subsystem.

Dependence of the performance of the integrated graphics of an Intel processor on the frequency of RAM

The situation looks better when using AMD hybrid processors. Increasing the speed of RAM gives a more impressive increase in FPS; in the frequency delta of 1866-2400 MHz we are dealing with an increase of 2-4 frames per second. I think that using RAM with an effective frequency of 2400 MHz in all test benches is a rational solution. And closer to reality.

Dependence of the performance of the integrated graphics of an AMD processor on the frequency of RAM

We will judge the performance of integrated graphics based on the results of thirteen gaming applications. I roughly divided them into four categories. The first includes popular but undemanding PC hits. Millions play them. Therefore, such games (“tanks”, Word of Warcraft, League of Legends, Minecraft - here) have no right to be demanding. We can expect a comfortable FPS level at high graphics quality settings in Full HD resolution. The remaining categories were simply divided into three time periods: the 2013/14, 2015 and 2016 games.

Integrated graphics performance depends on RAM frequency

The quality of graphics was selected individually for each program. For undemanding games, these are mainly high settings. For other applications (with the exception of Bioshock Infinite, Battlefield 4 and DiRT Rally) the graphics quality is low. Still, we will test the built-in graphics in Full HD resolution. Screenshots describing all graphics quality settings are located in the screenshot of the same name. We will consider 25 fps to be playable.

Undemanding games	2013/14 Games	Games of 2015	Games of 2016
Dota 2 - high;	Bioshock Infinite - average;	Fallout 4 - low;	Rise of the Tomb Raider - low;
Diablo III - high;	Battlefield 4 - average;	GTA V - standard;	Need for Speed ​​- low;
StarCraft II - high.	Far Cry 4 - low.		XCOM 2 - low.
		DiRT Rally - high.
Diablo III - high;	Battlefield 4 - average;	GTA V - standard;
StarCraft II - high.	Far Cry 4 - low.	"The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt" - low;
		DiRT Rally - high.
Diablo III - high;	Battlefield 4 - average;
StarCraft II - high.	Far Cry 4 - low.
Diablo III - high;
StarCraft II - high.

HD

The main purpose of testing is to study the performance of integrated processor graphics in Full HD resolution, but first, let's warm up on a lower HD. The iGPU Radeon R7 (for both A8 and A10) and Iris Pro 6200 felt quite comfortable in such conditions. But the HD Graphics 530 with its 25 actuators in some cases produced a completely unplayable picture. Specifically: in five games out of thirteen, since in Rise of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry 4, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Need for Speed ​​and XCOM 2 there is no place to reduce the quality of graphics. It is obvious that in Full HD the integrated video of the Skylake chip is a complete failure.

HD Graphics 530 already merges in 720p resolution

The Radeon R7 graphics used in the A8-7670K failed in three games, the Iris Pro 6200 failed in two, and the built-in A10-7890K failed in one.

Test results in 1280x720 pixels resolution

Interestingly, there are games in which the integrated video of the Core i5-5675C seriously outperforms the Radeon R7. For example, in Diablo III, StarCraft II, Battlefield 4 and GTA V. Low resolution affects not only the presence of 48 actuators, but also processor dependence. And also the presence of a fourth level cache. At the same time, the A10-7890K outperformed its opponent in the more demanding Rise of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry 4, The Witcher 3 and DiRT Rally. The GCN architecture works well in modern (and not so modern) hits.