3 ms·

Aren't AMD's APU's a better product for that market and will replace intel sooner or later?

by petra 6y ago

boring_twenties 6y ago
One difference is that AMD only offers integrated graphics with weak CPUs, while Intel, unless something's changed recently, offers them on all their consumer models.
- kemotep 6y ago
  Intel has started offering "F" SKU processors without integrated graphics only very recently with 9th and 10th gen Core CPU's. But yes otherwise, nearly every Intel CPU has integrated graphics whereas only a few select AMD CPU's have integrated graphics (and AMD brands them as APU's not CPU's).
  - boring_twenties 6y ago
    I'd be okay with only a few select CPUs, if even one of them was a reasonably powerful one. Instead, it's only the bottom of the barrel CPUs performance-wise. It seems that is changing somewhat with the 4000-series APUs, but guess what, those are only going to be sold to OEMs, not individuals. It's all rather frustrating, since I'm still on an i7-4770k and wouldn't mind an upgrade.
    - hnuser123456 6y ago
      So your situation is you want to DIY build a desktop with an integrated CPU+GPU, with a significant upgrade from a 4770k. 4770k passmark: 7042 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K+%40+3.50GHz&id=1919 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K... Ryzen 5 3400G passmark: 9421 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+3400G&id=3498 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+3400G&i... Intel Graphics 4600 (in 4770k): 649 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4600&id=2451 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4600... RX Vega 11 (in 3400G): 2106 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+RX+Vega+11&id=3893 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+RX+Veg... So relative to 4770k, 3400G has a 33% faster CPU, and 3.25x the GPU.
      - boring_twenties 6y ago
        > 3400G has a 33% faster CPU Right. That's not a significant upgrade IMO. I'm not even sure it would be worth it if it merely required a CPU swap. Since it actually requires a new motherboard, it's not even close to worth it. A real upgrade would be to a 3900X (passmark: 32861), or at the very last, a 3600 (passmark: 17828). But those require a discrete GPU. The 4700G looks like it would more or less suffice (passmark: unknown, ~18k?) , but it won't be sold to individuals, only OEMs. > 3.25x the GPU. As far as I can tell, I've never run into any limits of the 4770K's iGPU, so I don't think this matters. Running dual 1920x1200 monitors.
        hnuser123456 6y ago
        It would also let you upgrade from DDR3 to DDR4 and ~double your memory bandwidth. But if you wait another year or two, you could jump right to a DDR5 system :)
        boring_twenties 6y ago
        Good point. Plus, of course, NVMe. Maybe I should review AMD's GPU offerings again. Do you happen to know anything about this? Last time I was looking for (fanless + dirt cheap + dual display), and couldn't find anything that fit all 3. However... I didn't ask the question, does the fan run all the time, or only under heavy load? Also, with lots of games reportedly working on Linux these days, maybe I should replace "dirt cheap" with "reasonably cheap."
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
TomVDB 6y ago
AMD bet on APUs more than a decade ago, hoping to grab the market with better GPUs than Intel, and have been offering a better product about as long. But the reality is that vast majority of business desktops and laptop don't need anything better than what Intel offers. If AMD gains share in that segment (and it looks like they are), it will IMO be because of finally having a better CPU, not because of a better GPU.

Aren't AMD's APU's a better product for that market and will replace intel sooner or later?

by petra 6y ago

Aren't AMD's APU's a better product for that market and will replace intel sooner or later?

One difference is that AMD only offers integrated graphics with weak CPUs, while Intel, unless something's changed recently, offers them on all their consumer models.

kemotep 6y ago
Intel has started offering "F" SKU processors without integrated graphics only very recently with 9th and 10th gen Core CPU's. But yes otherwise, nearly every Intel CPU has integrated graphics whereas only a few select AMD CPU's have integrated graphics (and AMD brands them as APU's not CPU's).
- boring_twenties 6y ago
  I'd be okay with only a few select CPUs, if even one of them was a reasonably powerful one. Instead, it's only the bottom of the barrel CPUs performance-wise. It seems that is changing somewhat with the 4000-series APUs, but guess what, those are only going to be sold to OEMs, not individuals. It's all rather frustrating, since I'm still on an i7-4770k and wouldn't mind an upgrade.
  - hnuser123456 6y ago
    So your situation is you want to DIY build a desktop with an integrated CPU+GPU, with a significant upgrade from a 4770k. 4770k passmark: 7042 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K+%40+3.50GHz&id=1919 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K... Ryzen 5 3400G passmark: 9421 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+3400G&id=3498 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+3400G&i... Intel Graphics 4600 (in 4770k): 649 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4600&id=2451 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4600... RX Vega 11 (in 3400G): 2106 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+RX+Vega+11&id=3893 https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+RX+Veg... So relative to 4770k, 3400G has a 33% faster CPU, and 3.25x the GPU.
    - boring_twenties 6y ago
      > 3400G has a 33% faster CPU Right. That's not a significant upgrade IMO. I'm not even sure it would be worth it if it merely required a CPU swap. Since it actually requires a new motherboard, it's not even close to worth it. A real upgrade would be to a 3900X (passmark: 32861), or at the very last, a 3600 (passmark: 17828). But those require a discrete GPU. The 4700G looks like it would more or less suffice (passmark: unknown, ~18k?) , but it won't be sold to individuals, only OEMs. > 3.25x the GPU. As far as I can tell, I've never run into any limits of the 4770K's iGPU, so I don't think this matters. Running dual 1920x1200 monitors.
      - hnuser123456 6y ago
        It would also let you upgrade from DDR3 to DDR4 and ~double your memory bandwidth. But if you wait another year or two, you could jump right to a DDR5 system :)
        boring_twenties 6y ago
        Good point. Plus, of course, NVMe. Maybe I should review AMD's GPU offerings again. Do you happen to know anything about this? Last time I was looking for (fanless + dirt cheap + dual display), and couldn't find anything that fit all 3. However... I didn't ask the question, does the fan run all the time, or only under heavy load? Also, with lots of games reportedly working on Linux these days, maybe I should replace "dirt cheap" with "reasonably cheap."
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

TomVDB 6y ago

AMD bet on APUs more than a decade ago, hoping to grab the market with better GPUs than Intel, and have been offering a better product about as long. But the reality is that vast majority of business desktops and laptop don't need anything better than what Intel offers. If AMD gains share in that segment (and it looks like they are), it will IMO be because of finally having a better CPU, not because of a better GPU.