Why onboard video?

[kb5zue]

Just something to think about.  Since most if not all, computers use graphics cards, then why do the manufacturers put graphics in the cpu?  I have been thinking about this for a while and just can't seem to come up with a suitable answer.  Is there something out there that would use onboard graphics better than using a video card?  Inquiring minds want to know.

[Slottr]

Not everyone needs a dedicated gpu

[WhitetailAni]

Why bother using a dedicated graphics card if you don't need the power that comes with one?
It'll just suck more power and create more heat for no benefit.

[Zando_]

Not everyone is a gamer or working in anything requiring beefy render horsepower. I'd wager the majority of PCs people actually use either don't have a dGPU, or they're on a platform without iGPUs so they have a super basic dGPU that does display out (which is all most people need). The only PCs at my work that have dGPUs are the couple Ryzen non-G chip based ones that need display out, and one laptop (A Zephryus G14) because it was the only decent machine available at the time. And I think 2 iMacs because they're the 27" models and there isn't an option without a dGPU (which we would take, because those would be cheaper and we don't need the beefier GPUs). 

[Haraikomono]

5 minutes ago, kb5zue said:

Just something to think about.  Since most if not all, computers use graphics cards, then why do the manufacturers put graphics in the cpu?  I have been thinking about this for a while and just can't seem to come up with a suitable answer.  Is there something out there that would use onboard graphics better than using a video card?  Inquiring minds want to know.

let me show you instead of writing 10000 letters:

try to fit a gpu into a case like this

[Kisai]

6 minutes ago, kb5zue said:

Just something to think about.  Since most if not all, computers use graphics cards, then why do the manufacturers put graphics in the cpu?  I have been thinking about this for a while and just can't seem to come up with a suitable answer.  Is there something out there that would use onboard graphics better than using a video card?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Businesses that look at spreadsheets and word processors all day don't need sophisticated GPU's. the iGPU's are more than enough as long as they are using 1080p monitors at most.

[Zando_]

Just now, Kisai said:

Businesses that look at spreadsheets and word processors all day don't need sophisticated GPU's. the iGPU's are more than enough as long as they are using 1080p monitors at most.

Shit lotta iGPUs (every single one I've tried on any decently current hardware) have no issue with 4K and sometimes push higher resolutions easily as well. Stuff from like 2011-2012 or so can often hate anything above 2560x1600, but you gotta go back a gooood while for 1080p to be the limit. 

[TetraSky]

3 hours ago, kb5zue said:

Since most if not all, computers use graphics cards,

That's where you're wrong.

Most computers actually use integrated graphics.

Gamers don't make up the majority of computer users. Business users and people buying PCs from HP or Dell on the cheap, which typically use iGPUs, are much more numerous.

[kb5zue]

Many thanks to all that took the time to think about this and respond.  I repair computers but don't have any business clients so don't really have any experience with iGPU's.  Once again, thanks for taking the time to answer my question.

[RONOTHAN##]

Linus Torvalds famously used Intel mainstream CPUs up until very recently because he just needed a display out. If you aren't doing anything that really requires 3D acceleration, why bother buying a GPU that costs a couple hundred dollars, uses a lot more power, takes up PCIe lanes that you could use for something else, and outputs more heat. 

[sub68]

Me: stares at 3 pc's

all of them have no GPU.

and I play games.

ok older games

R6 vegas and vegas2

osu!

all these don't really need GPU

[IkeaGnome]

At work for Oracle, web browsing, Excel and Outlook this gets me by just fine. I end up short on RAM occasionally. If I close out one of 5 or so spreadsheets it sorts it's self out (Too lazy to put in a ticket for more RAM).

At home. This wouldn't work for my use case.

[Kisai]

32 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Shit lotta iGPUs (every single one I've tried on any decently current hardware) have no issue with 4K and sometimes push higher resolutions easily as well. Stuff from like 2011-2012 or so can often hate anything above 2560x1600, but you gotta go back a gooood while for 1080p to be the limit. 

 

it depends. Most laptop cpu's iGPU's are not powerful enough to run anything at 1080p60, and most productivity software other than "powerpoint" programs and web browsers are fine operating at 1080p60. When you go above that, the OS often now desires to run in HiDPI mode, which handily doubles the gpu load.

 

But in most case you're right, it's not the iGPU that's the bottleneck, it's the RAM. iGPU's use system memory, and a lot of business laptops and desktops skimp on memory.

[tkitch]

1 hour ago, kb5zue said:

Just something to think about.  Since most if not all, computers use graphics cards, then why do the manufacturers put graphics in the cpu?  I have been thinking about this for a while and just can't seem to come up with a suitable answer.  Is there something out there that would use onboard graphics better than using a video card?  Inquiring minds want to know.

You obviously don't know the actual computer market.

 

The /ENTHUSIAST/ computer market relies on GPU's to run.  That's a fact.

 

But if you walk into a regular office?  PFFFFT.  Nope, nobody will have a GPU.

 

In the past 2 years I've replaced ~40 or 50 computers at my office (And I'll be replacing another 20 by the end of summer), and only ONE computer has had a discrete GPU.  (Because it was more of a Workstation build than an office PC.)

 

There are office buildings with hundreds of desktops and absolutely 0 Discrete GPUs.

 

Dell and HP and Lenovo?  They stay in business because of the business market, not because of the enthusiast market.  We're a hell of an afterthought to them.  For every 100 computers HP sells?  I bet 5 or so have discrete GPUs.

[Heliian]

I buy igpu chips mostly for having a backup in case of dgpu failure and I've done that even before the insane gpu market, easier for troubleshooting too. 

 

Some of these igpus are getting pretty decent and the future looks good for nice, compact, and powerful igpus.

 

[HerrKaLeu]

This maybe a surprise, but computers can get used for other things than gaming and mining. 

I spend 10 hours every days with two 42"  4K monitors and iGPU. 

 

I'm actually sad AMD neglects iGPU. 

 

 

[Mollari]

5 hours ago, kb5zue said:

Since most if not all, computers use graphics cards, then why do the manufacturers put graphics in the cpu?

Not every PC in the land is used for gaming or graphic intensive processes so why would you need a dedicated GPU?

My Pc is probably 10+ years old, no dedicated graphics and still used daily.

Granted, not being able to play 4k YouTube videos is a pain but I just watch them on the TV if I need to.

And If I want to game with pretty visuals I'll just put the Xbox on .

[whm1974]

wasn't the Ryzen 3 1200G capable of 1080p with a number of E-Sports games? Or least 720p anyway. With a reasonable framerate such as ~45fps, I consider that to be playable.

[Spindel]

I work with office suit (mainly excel) and AutoCAD I don’t need a dedicated GPU even if AutoCAD does run smoother with a better GPU (and since working from home I mainly use my M1 Mac Mini the better iGPU is actually really nice in running AutoCAD but not a must).

[Kisai]

6 hours ago, Spindel said:

I work with office suit (mainly excel) and AutoCAD I don’t need a dedicated GPU even if AutoCAD does run smoother with a better GPU (and since working from home I mainly use my M1 Mac Mini the better iGPU is actually really nice in running AutoCAD but not a must).

Laptops with iGPU absolutely melt if used for AutoCAD. The minimum requirements are a quadro m/p/t 2000 or roughly a GTX 1060. For memory bandwidth alone.

 

The major projects my clients do, 64 GB of system ram and a Quadro RTX 3000 is still insufficient. It’s just the nature of the beast for things like infrastructure.

[Spindel]

17 minutes ago, Kisai said:

Laptops with iGPU absolutely melt if used for AutoCAD. The minimum requirements are a quadro m/p/t 2000 or roughly a GTX 1060. For memory bandwidth alone.

 

The major projects my clients do, 64 GB of system ram and a Quadro RTX 3000 is still insufficient. It’s just the nature of the beast for things like infrastructure.

Eh no...

 

...at least not for all AutoCAD drawings and fields that use AutoCAD. 

 

Your proposal for system specs is just as ridiculous as people on car forums claiming any car with less than 400 HP is a traffic hazard.

 

Surely some type of work with AutoCAD needs those specs but I promise you, I sit and work with AutoCAD in a project right now (given on my mac) but I would have no problem firing this drawing up on my crappy (windows) work laptop with iGPU.

 

Does it run smoother on my Mac because of the better iGPU? Yeah!

Is it impossible to work on the windows laptop? No!

 

The biggest problem I have with AutoCAD is that some xrefs cause the program to freeze up for 10-20 seconds now and then, but that is not GPU related. 

[Kisai]

2 minutes ago, Spindel said:

Eh no...

 

...at least not for all AutoCAD drawings and fields that use AutoCAD. 

 

Your proposal for system specs is just as ridiculous as people on car forums claiming any car with less than 400 HP is a traffic hazard.

 

No, it's not. It's literately the requirements.

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/learn-explore/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/System-requirements-for-AutoCAD-2021-including-Specialized-Toolsets.html

Quote

Display Card

Basic: 1 GB GPU with 29 GB/s Bandwidth and DirectX 11 compliant Recommended: 4 GB GPU with 106 GB/s Bandwidth and DirectX 11 compliant

 

Mac

Quote

Model

Basic: Apple Mac Pro® 4.1, MacBook Pro® 5.1, iMac® 8.1, Mac mini® 3.1, MacBook Air®, MacBook® 5.1 Recommended: Apple Mac® models supporting Metal Graphics Engine Apple Mac models with M series chip are supported under Rosetta 2 mode.

 

Intel iGPU's have 22GB/s, and Quadro 1000 parts have 80GB/s. I've personally benchmarked this at an engineering office. The typical GPU in all 15" engineering laptops are Quadro (M/T/P/RTX) 1000/1200 parts and fall short of the Recommended requirements, and typically suffer cooling failures after about a year. The Latitudes with an iGPU, always fail if an engineer mistakenly orders one because they're small and portable. It takes several minutes to load and render a project on the latitude vs seconds on the Precision 15". The 17" laptops more than meet the requirements for AutoCAD but not always for the project.

 

If your engineering office is giving you computers with iGPU's and you're expected to run AutoCAD on it, your office is being too cheap. A $6,000 desktop or laptop with appropriate parts is a pittance compared to the millions or even billions of dollars lost if a project can't be completed on time because the computers being used waste the clients time and your deliverables aren't being met.

 

If you're just doing hobby stuff in AutoCAD , sure, maybe the iGPU isn't the worst option vs nothing, but you're not being productive on an iGPU for CAD.

 

With that said, as I stated earlier in the thread, the bottleneck is the system memory with iGPU's. They are knee-capped to system memory bandwidth.

 

I could probably go on an entire rant about the inappropriateness of certain laptop and SFF/ITX desktops, but it all boils down to "if your office is unwilling to buy appropriate hardware, don't be surprised if the office loses clients/bids when you waste their time, and they tell their partners" Suffice it to say, some of this can be laid at the foot of HP and Dell, because of the trend to "thin-and-light", has also lead to short lived cooling solutions, and some highly inappropriate compromises.

 

 

 

[Spindel]

8 minutes ago, Kisai said:

No, it's not. It's literately the requirements.

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/learn-explore/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/System-requirements-for-AutoCAD-2021-including-Specialized-Toolsets.html

 

Mac

 

Intel iGPU's have 22GB/s, and Quadro 1000 parts have 80GB/s. I've personally benchmarked this at an engineering office. The typical GPU in all 15" engineering laptops are Quadro (M/T/P/RTX) 1000/1200 parts and fall short of the Recommended requirements, and typically suffer cooling failures after about a year. The Latitudes with an iGPU, always fail if an engineer mistakenly orders one because they're small and portable. It takes several minutes to load and render a project on the latitude vs seconds on the Precision 15". The 17" laptops more than meet the requirements for AutoCAD but not always for the project.

 

If your engineering office is giving you computers with iGPU's and you're expected to run AutoCAD on it, your office is being too cheap. A $6,000 desktop or laptop with appropriate parts is a pittance compared to the millions or even billions of dollars lost if a project can't be completed on time because the computers being used waste the clients time and your deliverables aren't being met.

 

If you're just doing hobby stuff in AutoCAD , sure, maybe the iGPU isn't the worst option vs nothing, but you're not being productive on an iGPU for CAD.

 

With that said, as I stated earlier in the thread, the bottleneck is the system memory with iGPU's. They are knee-capped to system memory bandwidth.

 

I could probably go on an entire rant about the inappropriateness of certain laptop and SFF/ITX desktops, but it all boils down to "if your office is unwilling to buy appropriate hardware, don't be surprised if the office loses clients/bids when you waste their time, and they tell their partners" Suffice it to say, some of this can be laid at the foot of HP and Dell, because of the trend to "thin-and-light", has also lead to short lived cooling solutions, and some highly inappropriate compromises.

 

 

 

Funnily I work (as in make my living) with a iGPU intel as work computer. Oh and I do drawing not renderings.

[tkitch]

9 hours ago, whm1974 said:

wasn't the Ryzen 3 1200G capable of 1080p with a number of E-Sports games? Or least 720p anyway. With a reasonable framerate such as ~45fps, I consider that to be playable.

Go look at the recent Gamer's Nexus video relating to the newest iGPU vs the GT 1030

 

[rockyroller]

A question I'd want to know is if I had a PCIe GPU and paired it with a iCPU would I get some kind of SLI benifit if they were the same chipset equivalent?

I believe LTT got a no video port GPU to run using a lower quality iCPU so that's a thing.

Then lastly when there are no GPU cards its the only game in town.