Difference between iGPUs

[da na]

What is the difference between having a GPU in your CPU, or like my AM2 Asus motherboard, having an integrated (in this case GeForce 8300 GS) on the motherboard itself?

[minibois]

5 minutes ago, wat3rmelon_man2 said:

What is the difference between having a GPU in your CPU, or like my AM2 Asus motherboard, having an integrated (in this case GeForce 8300 GS) on the motherboard itself?

What sort of answer are you looking for?

Because I could give the obvious answer of "well with one of them the graphics unit is in the CPU, while with the other it's in the motherboard" or are you looking for a more technical answer, i.e. relating to shared memory and that sort of stuff?

Or are you talking about performance, or power use, etc.?

[FakeFBI]

23 minutes ago, minibois said:

What sort of answer are you looking for?

Because I could give the obvious answer of "well with one of them the graphics unit is in the CPU, while with the other it's in the motherboard" or are you looking for a more technical answer, i.e. relating to shared memory and that sort of stuff?

Or are you talking about performance, or power use, etc.?

i just say this end of day, they do same thing, same output, they work same way, they both mobile gpu's in a motherboard of cpu, basicly just a shit portable graphics

[minibois]

7 minutes ago, FakeFBI said:

i just say this end of day, they do same thing, same output, they work same way, they both mobile gpu's in a motherboard of cpu, basicly just a shit portable graphics

That's great for you, but obviously OP could be having different sort of questions which are not answered by the statement above.

[FakeFBI]

Just now, minibois said:

That's great for you, but obviously OP could be having different sort of questions which are not answered by the statement above.

yes, ik he would want some science of how they are different but a average consumer aint care 

[da na]

45 minutes ago, minibois said:

What sort of answer are you looking for?

Because I could give the obvious answer of "well with one of them the graphics unit is in the CPU, while with the other it's in the motherboard" or are you looking for a more technical answer, i.e. relating to shared memory and that sort of stuff?

Or are you talking about performance, or power use, etc.?

I am literally talking about, "what is different about them when it comes to shared memory and power usage" and why do some motherboards have graphics instead of using graphics on CPU

[SupaKomputa]

Onboard gpu is a thing of the past, since AMD relaesed APU and Intel have iGPU, there are no more motherboard with onboard graphics.

Having the GPU inside the CPU makes it more efficient and cost effective.

iGPU use shared memory because it doesn't have memory chip attached.

Why do motherboard in the past have gpu? Well it's meant for business / office which doesn't need  a high end GPU and only needs it for display.

The gpu chip later is small enough to fit inside a CPU, so onboard gpu became obsolete.

[-iSynthesis]

Motherboard GPUs are a relict of the past, pretty much the only application they're still used for is server motherboards for basic Displays.

They have many disadvantages; They can't be powerful as that would require active cooling. They would increase the cost of the motherboard as it would be another processor that would have to be soldered onto the motherboard.

Putting it onto the CPU is an easy way out; The GPU is just another addition to the existing silicon. It's connected to the memory anyways and it's actively cooled. It just needs a few extra phases power delivery on the board. 

 

They're a viable option nowadays for servers as basic display outputs. A very weak GPU is enough to do so. Also, it wouldn't be viable to try to integrate an iGPU onto a massive die such as an Epyc or Xeon with as many pins as they have already anyways. Also many servers don't require any display output at all so it would be a waste to implement one.

[camieabz]

Main differences:

 

1) The iGPU uses system RAM

1.1) System RAM is slower than GPU vRAM

1.2) iGPUs do well from faster RAM, but this is more expensive, so there's an argument to just spend the extra on a cheap GPU.

1.3) Whatever RAM you allocate to the iGPU, you can't use for other tasks

 

2) iGPUs tend to be a lot slower than the range of GPUs on the market. There are low-budget exceptions, but even these take the load off the CPU with their own vRAM

 

3) Assuming the drivers work for the iGPU, there's less need for driver config. That and the low price are the only real benefits of an iGPU.

 

See this comparison of Vega8/Vega11 and GT710, GT1030 and GTX 1650 - https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/compare/Radeon-Vega-8-vs-Radeon-Vega-11-vs-GeForce-GT-1030-vs-GeForce-GTX-1650-vs-GeForce-GT-710/3895vs4136vs3757vs4078vs2910

 

Note that the GT 710 is a very poor card. The GT 1030 is generally the better 'inexpensive' option to an iGPU. You get 2GB of vRAM, and better than Vega level performance. It's probably fine for keeping the stutters away from the 1080p streams that might occur with an iGPU. If looking to do some budget gaming, the GT 1030 would probably be too weak for most, while the 1650 will be a more appropriate 'entry level' or budget gaming card.

 

I browse with an A8-7600 which has a Radeon R7 iGPU. I used it for about 12-18 months, then added a GTX 1050. The difference was massive, and the 1050 wasn't much more than 'entry-level' at the time. Now I have 8GB of RAM instead of 6GB, and a faster system all round. Just be aware that a CPU with an iGPU might be lower spec than other CPUs, so choose the right GPU for it. No point in having a new GPU and never seeing the potential of it.

 

A8-7600 vs 1050: https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/compare/Radeon-R7-A8-7600-vs-GeForce-GTX-1050/3007vs3596

[da na]

OK,

My integrated GPU on the motherboard I won't be using, as this is for a retro build and I would prefer not to use a GeForce 8300. Thanks!

If you're wondering, I'm using a Radeon HD 4870 x2.