Why is Intel still shipping high end CPU's with onboard graphics

[MikeS159]

Looking at the die for the i9-9900k (this seems to be true of a lot of their mainstream chips), a large part of the die is taken up with onboard graphics. A rough estimate from the picture in the link is that the GPU is 20-25% of the total die.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/File:coffee_lake_die_(octa_core)_(annotated).png

 

Maybe I am missing something, but I would guess a lot of the buyers of a i5/i7/i9 aren't going to be using onboard graphics. Intel could get rid of this an use smaller dies, which would reduce costs and probably help with their poor 10nm yields. Any reason they aren't doing this, especially with the AMD threat?

[Fasauceome]

2 minutes ago, madmike159 said:

Intel could get rid of this an use smaller dies, which would reduce costs and probably help with their poor 10nm yields

i5-9400F, i7-9700KF, i9-9900KF

[Radium_Angel]

4 minutes ago, madmike159 said:

onboard graphics

Low-end servers perhaps?

[Mister Woof]

26 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

i5-9400F, i7-9700KF, i9-9900KF

Aren't the iGPUs still physically there, though, just disabled?

 

I think the point the OP is trying to make is intentionally designing CPUs without them, not sell defective ones.

[Fasauceome]

Just now, Mister Woof said:

Aren't the iGPUs still physically there, though, just disabled?

 

I think the point the OP is trying to make is intentionally designing CPUs without them, not sell defective ones.

Idk what that would help though, wafer real estate maybe? Though disabling the iGPU does help yields a lot, because they don't have to throw away CPUs with busted GPUs

[MikeS159]

8 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

Aren't the iGPUs still physically there, though, just disabled?

 

I think the point the OP is trying to make is intentionally designing CPUs without them, not sell defective ones.

I thought that was the case

 

7 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

Idk what that would help though, wafer real estate maybe? Though disabling the iGPU does help yields a lot, because they don't have to throw away CPUs with busted GPUs

If you could fit 25% more CPU's on a wafer, then your costs should drop and yields would improve, I would assume.

[Princess Luna]

38 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

i5-9400F, i7-9700KF, i9-9900KF

These have nothing to do with what OP's stating. These are literally defective products where the iGPU is nonfunctional but the die is the same as their functioning counterparts.

 

OP If I remember correctly the iGPU actually takes up to 40% of the 9900K die and yes that place could be turned into more CPU cores but then the whole architecture has to change... as we know Ring Bus is pretty much impossible to use past 10 cores reason why HEDT processors like the i9 10980XE uses Mesh instead.

 

There are other differences applied to the processor to keep thermals/power usage in check, all in all it isn't just as simple as eliminate the iGPU and shove more processing power in there as is and the iGPU still does have good uses like extended hardware acceleration functionality through QuickSync or straight out just a display adapter in case of need.

[Sir0Tek]

On the other side the top AM4-mainboards (esp. µatx) that ship with 3-4 different video-connectors while almost noone will use these boards in combination with an apu...  Brainf....

I'd be happy if they'd decide to at least reduce these connectors - or if they find a way to make them usable to any graphics card, reducing the need to pack 3+ connections at the bracket.

 

Afaik Intel is going to make the igp usable in conjunction with a discrete gpu, to give some additional boost in dx12/vulkan - we did see this before with amd-apus, we might see more top-nodge apus as well when amd has to follow suit.