airbud7:

"first mainstream NUCs to feature discrete graphics." what d-gpu are they using?

lucidus:

Radeon 540 apparently. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc/mini-pcs/nuc8i3cysm.html

airbud7:

hey! I never heard of 540/ ..Thanks lucidus

SHS:

You never heard Radeon RX 540 it been out for long time Wow thing has a 90 watt power adapter

Fox2232:

RX 540 is bit weaker than Vega 11 in 2400G, but performs bit better than Vega 10 in 2200G. But results I checked are bit old and newer agesa updates improved iGPU performance, therefore it may be at level of Vega 10.

Fox2232:

RX 540 is bit weaker than Vega 11 in 2400G, but performs bit better than Vega 10 in 2200G. But results I checked are bit old and newer agesa updates improved iGPU performance, therefore it may be at level of Vega 10.

schmidtbag:

I'm sure this can be attributed to GPU drivers and memory bandwidth. I hear the APU GPU drivers have improved a bit since launch. So, assuming the 540 in this NUC feeds from system memory, it will likely be slower than the Vega 11.

Hilbert Hagedoorn:

Intel introduces new NUC kits and NUC mini PCs to the Intel NUC family featuring 8th Gen Intel® Core™ processors, providing greater choice for a wide range of mainstream computing needs.... Intel introduces new NUC kits and NUC mini PCs with 8th Gen CPUs

SHS:

That still good enough for Grandma and Grandpa and as Media Client sure it not going Play high end game

SHS:

It listed with it own 2GB of GDDR5 so no sheared memory

Fox2232:

Surely. 2200G I tested was just fine for lightweight gaming. This will be closely around. Here on those NUCs, they are smaller than uITX. My 2400G system has small 150W internal PSU. And allows for higher power consumption (heat, performance). As of those 2GB dedicated for GPU. I have 16GB ram and BIOS set to 4GB dedicated for iGPU. But for some reason even newest BIOS from 8th of August allocates only 2GB. (On that 2200G ASRock board 4GB was allocated without issue.) On other hand, I measured difference and while move from 0.5GB to 1GB was noticeable, going to 2GB was tiny on games I play. I wanted 4GB just for good feeling. Therefore 2GB on this NUC is sufficient as card does not have brute power to handle rendering/filtering of very high resolution textures anyway.

SHS:

I plan on get a 2200G with MSI B450 Gaming Plus board to go with my Emby media server for some GPU transcoding as my older APU A10 7800k just barely keep up as it is.

Fox2232:

Boost in performance will be quite good. But in my short testing, I think IQ is better via software encoding. On other hand, I did not look for some special parameters for GPU to control IQ. I use Handbrake for offline encoding. On desktop, 2700X manages to play games and encode 1080p @60fps with ABR 6000kbps Twitch on "Faster" profile (5th fastest and I think 2 above "Medium/Normal" speed in OBS Studio.) People usually use lower resolution and faster profile to reduce load on CPUs. While I think that 2200G CPU part will do transcoding faster and w/ better IQ, I think iGPU will be more power efficient.