This only makes sense in case they can use the GPU for specific situations were they are much better than using a GPU otherwise i don´t see the point.

Undying:

Price is only going to rise if there was a igpu in every cpu. Just look at 4750g and 5700g is way overpriced for what it is. You can actually get stronger desktop cpu without igpu aka 5800x.

Which says a lot considering the 5800X wasn't a good value to begin with.

cucaulay malkin:

wrong. paying $20 extra for a igpu sku was probably the best value you're gonna get these days out of any piece of hardware. if you're between cards,or want to troubleshoot,or most importantly - don't want to play games,you're getting video output for pennies.compare what the cheapest,new dedicated video card that'll let you display desktop costs in comparison - three times as much before the shortage. I used igpus a lot in my time of building computers.the only reason why I got a non-igpu sku this time is that I'm keeping this 1070 after I get a proper card. I had my r9 290 trix card up for rma twice,each time took a month.then it allows you to sell your old gpu before new ones drop and still ber able to use the pc.having an igpu for extra few bucks is very,very useful. not to mention the whole office/work branch that amd just let intel take cause they got a basic video output on their celerons/pentiums/i3s

You can just get an APU for that, no?

schmidtbag:

I disagree - GPUs tend to have larger dies than CPUs (yes, I'm including iGPUs here too) and there's already a massive shortage. Considering a pretty significant percentage of the market doesn't need an iGPU, that's a lot of wasted product that we're all paying extra for. The shortage isn't going to end any time soon.

they also increase the power requirements of the chip, the heat generated and when they don't, its because the cpu is afforded less power as a design tradeoff.

PrMinisterGR:

You can just get an APU for that, no?

comptelety different things

I have to say, now that I have like 3 generations of Zen CPUs sitting around - I kinda wish they had iGPUs even if it was just weak nothing for simple video out. But that's just me.

schmidtbag:

I disagree - GPUs tend to have larger dies than CPUs (yes, I'm including iGPUs here too) and there's already a massive shortage. Considering a pretty significant percentage of the market doesn't need an iGPU, that's a lot of wasted product that we're all paying extra for. The shortage isn't going to end any time soon.

except for basic video output you don't need cutting edge dies and processes did you read what I said ? the difference between 10400f and 10400 cpu is literally 11 euros and you're getting a functional video output.go check how much the cheapest gt710 is.

cucaulay malkin:

good.they're stupid for not putting it on their chips earilier.

I disagree. Its a lot of die space. When they move to 5nm is the perfect time as its a full node improvement on die space with some good power improvements moving to EUV as well.

cucaulay malkin:

except for basic video output you don't need cutting edge dies and processes

You also don't need a new GPU either. But considering that GPUs tend to take up more space while on the same node, it does actually make sense to use cutting edge processes, in order for everything to fit and for thermals to be manageable. The fact of the matter is, this is AMD we're talking about and they are using cutting edge processes. I don't see that stopping any time soon.

did you read what I said ? the difference between 10400f and 10400 cpu is literally 11 euros and you're getting a functional video output.go check how much the cheapest gt710 is.

Did you read what anyone else said? For AMD, the cost difference isn't the same. Once Intel switches to Xe for desktop graphics, it's going to be more than 11 euros difference. And like others have said, it's going to draw more power whether you use it or not. If you want/need an APU, great, nothing wrong with that. But for it to be a default configuration is more bad than good.

I have zero use for an integrated GPU. I would rather see the real estate used for more cache or something similarly useful.

Well, AMD didn't ask me for my input, but I'd confine the inclusion of integrated graphics to the Ryzen PRO series. If you include it on every processor, *and* it needs to function in order to be sold, it's just one more potential reason to toss a die into the dumpster when the igpu doesn't pass QC testing during production. That raises the cost of the entire run. Yes, having two masks, a "with" and "without" for Ryzen Pro and Ryzen, respectively, isn't ideal either. However, since AMD seems willing to produce Ryzen PRO-based APUs, like the current 4650G and 4750G, I'd rather see them stick to that approach and leave the CPUs without graphics. Let Dell, Lenovo and HP pass along the expense of 7000-series APUs to their customers, and leave the poor slobs like us alone.

I just hope they keep a few lower core sku's with the fully enabled gpu. It's silly having to get an 8core cpu just to get the fully enabled gpu for an itx build like the inwin choppin which is what I have the 2400g in and honestly in this case the cpu with 4c8t is way more than enuff the gpu is where it needs the power

schmidtbag:

You also don't need a new GPU either. But considering that GPUs tend to take up more space while on the same node, it does actually make sense to use cutting edge processes, in order for everything to fit and for thermals to be manageable. The fact of the matter is, this is AMD we're talking about and they are using cutting edge processes. I don't see that stopping any time soon. Did you read what anyone else said? For AMD, the cost difference isn't the same. Once Intel switches to Xe for desktop graphics, it's going to be more than 11 euros difference. And like others have said, it's going to draw more power whether you use it or not. If you want/need an APU, great, nothing wrong with that. But for it to be a default configuration is more bad than good.

it's 20 euros on 11400 vs 11400f,for a better igpu (I guess) still less than half of what a basic display would cost you otherwise. you're still gonna argue that it's not worth it ? show me another way to get a new display output for 20 euros. no one is saying default,but having an option to get this for 10,20 or make it even 30 euros is better than not having it.

JamesSneed:

I disagree. Its a lot of die space. When they move to 5nm is the perfect time as its a full node improvement on die space with some good power improvements moving to EUV as well.

yes but is it expensive die space ? no,it can be a 12/14nm part.

I just hope there will be option to choose CPU with iGPU and without it, personally I don't want iGPU and I never used iGPU to the date Hope this helps Thanks, Jura

icedman:

I just hope they keep a few lower core sku's with the fully enabled gpu. It's silly having to get an 8core cpu just to get the fully enabled gpu for an itx build like the inwin choppin which is what I have the 2400g in and honestly in this case the cpu with 4c8t is way more than enuff the gpu is where it needs the power

Yeah, I've felt the same way. Seeing as the dies are separate anyway, I don't see why they couldn't have 3 options per model: 1. High-end GPU (like Vega 11). Ideal for entry-level gaming. 2. Low-end GPU (like Vega 3). Ideal for office environments or HTPCs 3. No GPU The high-end GPU should basically be as fast as memory can keep up with, and the low-end GPU should be able to keep up with the bare minimum of desktop needs. There isn't really a point of having anything in-between, because the performance differences would be too small and they would just clutter up the product lineup.

cucaulay malkin:

it's 20 euros on 11400 vs 11400f,for a better igpu (I guess) still less than half of what a basic display would cost you otherwise. you're still gonna argue that it's not worth it ? show me another way to get a new display output for 20 euros.

You're missing the point - we all agree that integrated graphics is an affordable way to get a working display, but don't you see the issue in your logic? You're arguing for the sake of cost effectiveness, but there's nothing cost effective about buying a product you won't use. And remember, that chip is sucking up power and generating heat whether you use it or not. If you're going to brush aside the cost difference of the 11400F to the 11400, well, the cost difference between the 11400 and the 11500 is even smaller. They're both rated as 65W parts. Meanwhile, since the discussion is about AMD, they charge more for their iGPU, and by the time the 7000 series comes out, they'll have moved onto RDNA[2], which will likely be faster than Intel's Xe (and therefore have a higher premium). Unless AMD has a way to let the iGPU supplement a dGPU, it's just slowing down production, driving up prices, and adding heat.

schmidtbag:

You're missing the point - we all agree that integrated graphics is an affordable way to get a working display, but don't you see the issue in your logic? You're arguing for the sake of cost effectiveness, but there's nothing cost effective about buying a product you won't use. And remember, that chip is sucking up power and generating heat whether you use it or not. If you're going to brush aside the cost difference of the 11400F to the 11400, well, the cost difference between the 11400 and the 11500 is even smaller. They're both rated as 65W parts. Meanwhile, since the discussion is about AMD, they charge more for their iGPU, and by the time the 7000 series comes out, they'll have moved onto RDNA[2], which will likely be faster than Intel's Xe (and therefore have a higher premium). Unless AMD has a way to let the iGPU supplement a dGPU, it's just slowing down production, driving up prices, and adding heat.

fact is,and I wrote it many times in this thread,I did use an igpu in the recent-ish past a lot. when my card died twice,between gpus,for troubleshooting. having the option to buy a video output for pennies and not doing it is just silly.check out how many people are still buying the k-series cpus when kf is cheaper. amd is recognizing it and it's a good move.

I not fan of iGPU but I can see how there useful special now consider how impossible it to get your hands on gpu now cause miners, and IF you dont need a $200-800+ gpu in first place or if need to test different gpu to see if dGPU has fault in it like if Video out ports are fault. my worry like others is miners might turn there eye to cpu to mine and makes things worse, but I would also assume there hashrates are not even 50% the has rates the dGPU get, but if they looking to fine that might not even matter. I am happy i got hold of PS5 cause with current prices raiasing and mining issue making there card impossible to find less will to pay the 2-3x scapling prices which most are not, just means I will not be bother to rebuild my pc or even bother for the foreseeable future

You guys arguing for the igpu in enthusiast CPU's are crazy and/or unlucky I've never needed the igpu since I got my first cpu with igpu(2500k) I did tinker with it and the 3770k igpu and my conclusion is they're completely useless aside from just getting video out AMD on the other hand has a capable igpu in their APU's that fill a niche market that I personally enjoy.

cucaulay malkin:

fact is,and I wrote it many times in this thread,I did use an igpu in the recent-ish past a lot. when my card died twice,between gpus,for troubleshooting. having the option to buy a video output for pennies and not doing it is just silly.check out how many people are still buying the k-series cpus when kf is cheaper. amd is recognizing it and it's a good move.

You can mention that as many times as you want, but anecdotes aren't the way to establish a point. It's pretty uncommon for a PC enthusiast to encounter a dead GPU and not have a spare somewhere. It's very uncommon for a non-enthusiast to encounter a dead GPU, let alone know to switch to integrated (or how to do so). So for most people, that iGPU will never be used for its usable lifetime. There are reasons to buy a non-F series, just as there are reasons to buy a high-end AMD APU. You seem to get this impression I'm saying the product shouldn't exist. What I'm saying is it shouldn't be the only option when it won't be "a video output for pennies". You have to account for all variables here, but you're only looking at your personal needs. As a side note, Intel graphics have good hardware acceleration for non-3D applications while using a low wattage. So it's pretty common for people to deliberately have an Intel iGPU while also having a dGPU. AMD still lags in things like encoding/decoding and some content-creation programs.

right,anecdotes of rma,troubleshooting,selling cards and waiting for new ones..so uncommon for pc users but accelerating quick time with igpu when there's h264 and cuda - so common 🙄 let's wrap it up dude,is there anything you'd like to add to that pile of nonsense ?