Friday, July 24th 2015

Skylake iGPU Gets Performance Leap, Incremental Upgrade for CPU Performance

With its 6th generation Core "Skylake" processors, Intel is throwing in everything it's got, into increasing performance of the integrated graphics. This is necessitated not by some newfound urge to compete with entry-discrete GPUs from NVIDIA or AMD, but a rather sudden increase in display resolutions, after nearly a decade of stagnation. Notebook and tablet designers are wanting to cram in higher resolution displays, such as WQHD (2560 x 1440), 4K (3840 x 2160), and beyond, and are finding it impossible to achieve them without discrete graphics. This is what Intel is likely after. The aftereffect of this effort would be that the iGPU will be finally capable of playing some games at 720p or 900p resolutions, with moderate eye-candy. Games such as League of Legends should be fairly playable, even at 1080p. Intel claims that its 9th generation integrated graphics will over a 50% performance increment over the previous generation.

Moving on to CPU, and the performance-increase is a predictable 10-20% single/multi-thread CPU performance, over "Broadwell." This is roughly similar to how "Haswell" bettered "Ivy Bridge," and how "Sandy Bridge" bettered "Lynnfield." Intel will provide platform support on some of its "Skylake-U" ultraportable variants, for much of the modern I/O used by today's tablets and notebooks, which required third-party controllers, and which competing semi-custom SoCs natively offer, such as eMMC 5.0, SDIO 3.0, SATA 6 Gb/s, PCIe gen 3.0, and USB 3.0. Communications are also improved, with 2x 802.11 ac, Bluetooth 4.1, and WiDi 6.0.
Source: FanlessTech
Add your own comment

100 Comments on Skylake iGPU Gets Performance Leap, Incremental Upgrade for CPU Performance

#1
ZoneDymo
I kinda feel the first sentence should have been typed out like :
"With its 6th generation Core "Skylake" processors, Intel is throwing in everything it's got!......... into increasing performance of the integrated graphics.........."
Posted on Reply
#2
RejZoR
The 6700K CPU should be a hexacore. It's 2015 and they still consider a quadcore to be "enthusiast" level. C'mon, really!? I see ZERO point in switching and I have a Core i7 920. Only thing that I'd realistically gain is power consumption and some new instructions. Do your math how long can I use my existing i7 920 to justify the price difference in electricity bills...

From what I've checked, everything is identical. Cache sizes, core count, thread count etc. Hell, I even have triple channel on my ancient grunt and Skylake is only dual channel. Like ugh!? Totally pointless product. It only makes sense if you don't have a computer and you're buiying from scratch. Or you have some shitty dual core from 10 years ago...
Posted on Reply
#3
Sakurai
Is the integrated GPU comparable to any of NV's low-end chips?
Posted on Reply
#4
RejZoR
If they say games like League of Legends is "fairly" playable at 1080p that probably means they are comparing it to the lowest possible end of discrete graphic cards. AMD on the release conference for Radeon 300 series talked about LoL when they were hodling their lowest end R7 cards in their hands so do the math. And I think they were talking about 60fps iirc. I'm not so sure Intel is capable of 60fps. Not to mention quality levels. Intel always had shitty controls for FSAA and AF. Not that it can run many things with those enabled but sill, for older games it is useful...
Posted on Reply
#5
jax
Upgrade path from socket 1366 goes to socket 2011, extreme edition cpu. i7-6700k is considered mainstream, not enthusiast.
Posted on Reply
#6
HumanSmoke
Sakurai, post: 3319540, member: 139179"
Is the integrated GPU comparable to any of NV's low-end chips?
The current (Broadwell) Iris Pro 6200 is at the same level as the GT 740...so technically yes, but barely.
Posted on Reply
#7
techy1
And again - none cares about iGPU progress - I know that many people use only iGPU - BUT they are usually so uninformed (you can insert other synonyms for - being dumb) that they would not spot a difference between HD2000 and irisPRO anyway (both can run movies un fullHD, both can run angrybirds and browse pinterest or run office aps)... So why to bother and give them +30% better iGPU every generation and neglect CPU evolution??? Do you ever have heard or read something like this "omg, these new intel CPUs have sooo better iGPU - I need an upgrade now... Lets go to starbucks afterwards" ?
Posted on Reply
#8
lynx29
Why is Intel partnered with McAfee?

I see in the first image there is something built into the chip called McAfee YAP... wth is this? McAfee is a terrible company and software... looks like I am hanging on to my SB until 10nm is actually on shelves...
Posted on Reply
#9
john_
lynx29, post: 3319554, member: 153071"
Why is Intel partnered with McAfee?

I see in the first image there is something built into the chip called McAfee YAP... wth is this? McAfee is a terrible company and software... looks like I am hanging on to my SB until 10nm is actually on shelves...
Maybe because Intel owns McAfee? Just a wild guess :p
Posted on Reply
#10
SonicZap
Am I the only one who is actually interested in these iGPU improvements? I mean, I'm currently satisfied with a Radeon HD 7850. With these +50% performance increases each generation, Intel is going to catch and exceed the performance of current mid-range graphics cards within a few years. Then I could just buy a Core i7 and get great CPU performance and good-enough graphics performance, instead of buying a Core i3/i5 and a €200 discrete GPU to go with it. TBH I've been waiting for AMD to do this "gaming APU", but it's looking like Intel has now beat AMD in integrated graphics with Skylake.

Of course I might still buy that discrete GPU unless Intel starts improving their drivers..
Posted on Reply
#11
lynx29
john_, post: 3319558, member: 137560"
Maybe because Intel owns McAfee? Just a wild guess :p
Hmm, hope AMD's next cpu can at least compete in games with DX12 active, rather not have anything McAfee in my PC thanks. terrible antivirus company
Posted on Reply
#12
john_
SonicZap, post: 3319559, member: 157033"
Intel has now beat AMD in integrated graphics with Skylake
That Skylake doesn't cost $140 like a A10 78X0K. It costs as much as 3 or 4 quad core APUs. Also AMD didn't had the money to improve Kaveri. If AMD had better economics we could already had a Carrizo with DDR4 support on an FM3 or something, probably with more advance GCN architecture than the one in Fury.
Anyway what you dream is what Nvidia fears, that's why they keep presenting, more and more hi end cards, instead of mid range. What you dream is what we will have in 1-2 years from now with 16nm and HBM. :)
Posted on Reply
#13
Ubersonic
RejZoR, post: 3319538, member: 1515"
The 6700K CPU should be a hexacore. It's 2015 and they still consider a quadcore to be "enthusiast" level. C'mon, really!? I see ZERO point in switching and I have a Core i7 920. Only thing that I'd realistically gain is power consumption and some new instructions.
From an i7 920 to a i7 6700K you're looking at a ~67% performance increase clock for clock, that's hardly ZERO point.


RejZoR, post: 3319538, member: 1515"
From what I've checked, everything is identical. Cache sizes, core count, thread count etc. Hell, I even have triple channel on my ancient grunt and Skylake is only dual channel. Like ugh!? Totally pointless product.
Dual channel DDR4 is roughly equal to triple/quad channel DDR3 in performance (depending on speed of DDR4) due to the higher performance per stick.
Posted on Reply
#14
RejZoR
Show me the difference in games between i7 920 at 4,2GHz and that Skylake. It'll probably be identical. Paying premium for 3 seconds less in 7zip compression, I couldn't care less...
Posted on Reply
#15
john_
I think there is one more reason why Intel wants to improve its iGPU. DirectX 12 and asynchronous multi GPU support.

Today we have DirectX 11 and the iGPU is not used when gaming with a discrete GPU(dual graphics is not important). So, with DirectX11 Intel CPUs win easily against AMD APUs. The iGPU performance doesn't count here.

Tomorrow we will be playing DirectX 12 games. AMD will hopefully have a better architecture with Zen, but even without that, AMD offers more cores at the same prices. With the multithreaded performance that DirectX 12 offers, the difference between using an 4 core APU and a 2 core + HT i3 will be much smaller if any. With asynchronous multi GPU, the iGPU part of the APU will offer much higher help to the discrete GPU, probably making the APU + discrete GPU combination, performing much better than the i3 + discrete GPU combination.
Posted on Reply
#16
SonicZap
john_, post: 3319564, member: 137560"
That Skylake doesn't cost $140 like a A10 78X0K. It costs as much as 3 or 4 quad core APUs.
Yes, but if I'm looking for good performance and longevity, I would still rather pay €350 for a Skylake i7 than €140 for a A10 7870K. The difference in CPU performance is massive, and GPU wise Skylake is also going to be dozens of % better.

Also, at this pace, in 2017 Intel's iGPU will be 200% faster than AMD's, not only a few dozen percent. I'm not upgrading from my Phenom II and HD 7850 until 2016-2017 anyway.
Posted on Reply
#17
john_
SonicZap, post: 3319572, member: 157033"
Yes, but if I'm looking for good performance and longevity, I would still rather pay €350 for a Skylake i7 than €140 for a A10 7870K. The difference in CPU performance is massive, and GPU wise Skylake is also going to be dozens of % better.
You do get a much faster CPU. In fact that's what you pay. The much faster CPU. And probably when you are willing to pay almost 3 times the price, that's what interests you. The CPU, not the iGPU. Going from the 955 to a Skylake and keeping your 7850 is what you are probably going to do and then wait for Cannonlake or Zen and Greenland. You just have to wait a little longer.
Posted on Reply
#18
Sakurai
HumanSmoke, post: 3319548, member: 98425"
The current (Broadwell) Iris Pro 6200 is at the same level as the GT 740...so technically yes, but barely.
Then if the next Iris embedded in 6600k is truly 50% faster than the current Iris 6200, technically you will own a CPU die with a GPU comparabe to a $200 GTX 960. And the 6600k MSRP is just north of $250.
Posted on Reply
#19
john_
Nope, just about the R7 360 speed. But then, there are also the drivers. If people complain about AMD drivers, what is the case with Intel drivers?
Posted on Reply
#20
rooivalk
techy1, post: 3319551, member: 146421"
And again - none cares about iGPU progress - I know that many people use only iGPU - BUT they are usually so uninformed (you can insert other synonyms for - being dumb) that they would not spot a difference between HD2000 and irisPRO anyway (both can run movies un fullHD, both can run angrybirds and browse pinterest or run office aps)... So why to bother and give them +30% better iGPU every generation and neglect CPU evolution??? Do you ever have heard or read something like this "omg, these new intel CPUs have sooo better iGPU - I need an upgrade now... Lets go to starbucks afterwards" ?
It doesn't relate to you but it's relate to millions other.

My friend with old Athlon X2 (AMD 690 chipset?) can't play Dota 2 for example. Many Dota, LoL, CS (basically anything very popular) playerbase is still running basic PC/Notebook. Even if it's not for gaming, browser and Windows itself is accelerated using GPU. Good (i)GPU is a basic necessity now.
Posted on Reply
#21
Sakurai
I don't really know since I currently own a 3570k and the HD Graphics drivers have been stable so far. But since Skylake-S (the desktop ones) incorporates full hardware-level DX12 then pretty sure the iGPU will receive massive boost as well. The CPU gains might not be much but considering the Multiadapter feature, these Skylake chips should have tremendous value
Posted on Reply
#22
GreiverBlade
in a top end CPU i could care less for a IGP ...or any improvement in the domain, even for HTPC : why get a 350$ and more CPU when a 140$ APU could do basically the same? intel is trying to stay alone in the PC market and rule out nvidia and AMD?

"they should focus the R&D on something else ... or buy nvidia ... i don't get the intel IGP improvement madness ... oh yes ... future is NUC (or so they would like it to be) we all gonna have a tiny box with a intel CPU and IGP, so it's better they improve their IGP for when they will take over the world :D (i am totally not serious there ... )"

(ofc in the Laptop domain it's different ... tho, is a i7 2core +HT a top end CPU ... well in laptop it is ... :laugh: currently my i5-5200U + HD Graphics 5500 is enough ... no gaming notebook tho :roll: and surely way more affordable than a future Skl Laptop)
Posted on Reply
#23
RazrLeaf
Why are so many people this mad at Intel? They're a business that exists to make returns on investments. I'm surprised that they're willing to have such consistent product improvement when they really have no competition in the high end CPU market. Sure, I'd be happier if they gave us +30% CPU performance, but they have a strong lead, and would like to secure their future since they're not fighting for the present. But Intel sees that they're weak in their iGPU side of the business, and that's why their focus is there. It's all about making money at the end of the day, for any business that has to answer to investors.

TL;DR Start rooting for AMD if you want product improvements from Intel that aren't "pointless."
Posted on Reply
#24
SonicZap
RazrLeaf, post: 3319626, member: 150702"
Why are so many people this mad at Intel?
A big part of that is because Intel partially reached their current position with anticompetitive practices. AMD could (no way to know for sure, since they've mostly screwed themselves with bad decisions one after the other) be in a better shape today if they had gained the strong lead they deserved with the Athlon 64s, but Intel prevented that by forcing OEMs to delay AMD product launches.
Posted on Reply
#25
64K
I will wait for reviews to decide but I'm really wanting to build a new rig. Depending on Skylake vs Ivy Bridge (my present CPU) I may wait for Cannonlake.

john_, post: 3319571, member: 137560"
I think there is one more reason why Intel wants to improve its iGPU. DirectX 12 and asynchronous multi GPU support.

Today we have DirectX 11 and the iGPU is not used when gaming with a discrete GPU(dual graphics is not important). So, with DirectX11 Intel CPUs win easily against AMD APUs. The iGPU performance doesn't count here.

Tomorrow we will be playing DirectX 12 games. AMD will hopefully have a better architecture with Zen, but even without that, AMD offers more cores at the same prices. With the multithreaded performance that DirectX 12 offers, the difference between using an 4 core APU and a 2 core + HT i3 will be much smaller if any. With asynchronous multi GPU, the iGPU part of the APU will offer much higher help to the discrete GPU, probably making the APU + discrete GPU combination, performing much better than the i3 + discrete GPU combination.
AMD is also loosing hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars yearly doing things like that and are now on the verge of bankruptcy. I guess having owned my own business I think differently than most but one of the things that AMD fans love about AMD (cheap prices) is one of the things that has brought AMD to ruin over the years. When I owned my business I charged what everyone else was charging and usually my profit was high, occasionally ridiculously high but I was fine with that. If they didn't do business with me then they would pay the same elsewhere. I provided the best service that I could and beat out my competitors pretty well.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment