3 ms·
Integrated GPUs have had sufficient fill rate to composite 4x4k pixels for a while now. 32 million pixels * 60 fps = 1.8 billion pixels per second, which is a l
by aappleby 3y ago
Integrated GPUs have had sufficient fill rate to composite 4x4k pixels for a while now. 32 million pixels * 60 fps = 1.8 billion pixels per second, which is a lot but even integrated GPUs have compute measured in teraflops now. Memory bandwidth starts to become significant though - that 1.8Gpix/sec is 7.2Gbyte/s read, which is a big chunk of a DIMM's bandwidth if you have single-channel RAM.
- swores 3y agoThanks. I've never had a great understanding of GPUs though, maybe you could clarify for me - assuming decent RAM, how much could you do on those four 4k screens? Could you have a 4k video playing on each one? A game like CSGO that's more CPU heavy than GPU? More graphically intense games? Or is it more like it supports 4 monitors worth of business-type applications with maybe a single 4k video on one screen?
- aappleby 3y agoRough guess - CSGO on one monitor and web browsers on the other monitors would be OK, four 4k videos would probably not be ok. I looked up the specs for that GPU and they're roughly 1.5 teraflops compute and 20 gigapixels fill rate, so in theeeeory you could do a couple hundred FLOPSs and a dozen draws per 4kx4 pixel per frame, but in practice you're never going to get close to that.
- sliken 3y agoIndeed, definitely worth a second dimm. Careful some chromeboxes cheap out and offer only a single dimm. This is also why memory is often limited as 1x8GB or 2x4Gb. The second dimm is definitely worthwhile for improve GPU performance.