Thursday, February 16th 2017

Intel "Ice Lake-U" Gen 11 iGPU Features 48 Execution Units

Intel's next generation "Ice Lake" processor could integrate a significantly faster integrated graphics solution (iGPU), if a SiSoft SANDRA online database entry is to be believed. A prototype "Ice Lake" chip was benchmarked, with its iGPU being described by the database as "Intel UHD Graphics" based on the company's Gen 11 graphics architecture, which succeeds the current Gen 9.5 architecture implemented on "Coffee Lake" and "Kaby Lake." This iGPU is endowed with 48 execution units (EUs), which work out to 384 unified shaders; against 24 EUs and 192 shaders on Intel UHD 620. SANDRA also describes the iGPU as being able to share up to 6 GB of memory from the system memory; and featuring 768 KB of dedicated cache. Its reference clock is 600 MHz, double that of the UHD 620, although its boost clock remains a mystery. "Ice Lake" is being built on Intel's new 10 nm+ silicon fabrication process, so it's understandable for the company to significantly enlarge its iGPU.
Add your own comment

25 Comments on Intel "Ice Lake-U" Gen 11 iGPU Features 48 Execution Units

#1
Upgrayedd
When is Z390 and the 8cores supposed to come out?
Posted on Reply
#2
BorgOvermind
It's an improvement, but they are still (~5) years behind compared to the other 2 competitors when it comes to graphics.
Posted on Reply
#3
TheGuruStud
BorgOvermind said:
It's an improvement, but they are still (~5) years behind compared to the other 2 competitors when it comes to graphics.
And what's funnier, NO ONE wants it. They keep wasting die space and power on it. Keep the low end crap for OEM CPUs and let the big boys play.

They'll never get it. I'm gonna call them Cisco.
Posted on Reply
#4
londiste
BorgOvermind said:
It's an improvement, but they are still (~5) years behind compared to the other 2 competitors when it comes to graphics.
They are not competing for the same thing. Intel integrated video is practically in every Intel mainstream computer out there.
As far as performance goes, Intel's graphics are really not that bad. They are just small and somewhat underpowered. A version twice the size would be interesting to see.
Drivers and compatibility is quite well figured out, there are no major issue with that any more.

TheGuruStud said:
And what's funnier, NO ONE wants it.
What do you mean no one wants it? Raven Ridge has gathered quite a lot of positive feedback and with good reason. The Vega in it is about 4 times as large as Intel's iGPU...

Edit:
Actually, I would say this is non-news. GT3e has been 48 EU since Broadwell and Haswell GT3 had 40 EU. We will see if the new generation makes a difference, probably not.
Posted on Reply
#5
TheGuruStud
londiste said:
They are not competing for the same thing. Intel integrated video is practically in every Intel mainstream computer out there.
As far as performance goes, Intel's graphics are really not that bad. They are just small and somewhat underpowered. A version twice the size would be interesting to see.
Drivers and compatibility is quite well figured out, there are no major issue with that any more.

What do you mean no one wants it? Raven Ridge has gathered quite a lot of positive feedback and with good reason. The Vega in it is about 4 times as large as Intel's iGPU...
Yes, no one wants Intel's lol. Even if bigger, it's still going to be unsupported in games with shady drivers.

RAM is still too big of a limitation, though, regardless.
Posted on Reply
#6
londiste
I have not had compatibility issues with Intel Graphics drivers for years now. Low performance - sure. But not issues with unsupported games or shady drivers.
Posted on Reply
#7
TheGuruStud
londiste said:
I have not had compatibility issues with Intel Graphics drivers for years now. Low performance - sure. But not issues with unsupported games or shady drivers.
Did they fix opengl? I assume they haven't.
By unsupported, I mean good luck getting any fixes should a problem arise.

It's all moot to me as they're only good for low power or media PC.
Posted on Reply
#8
Imsochobo
TheGuruStud said:
Yes, no one wants Intel's lol. Even if bigger, it's still going to be unsupported in games with shady drivers.

RAM is still too big of a limitation, though, regardless.
Who are talking about games?
I have a intel IGP on an haswell, and not once have I desired more...
It's not being gamed at like 90% of the worlds computers that doesn't see a game.
Yes we want igp, before our laptops had additional 15w low end gpu guzzling power in our laptops and still wasn't capable of doing anything the igp solutions that came couldn't it just took valuable battery time.
Posted on Reply
#9
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Igp=no contest from Intel as AMD has the Contender...
Posted on Reply
#10
medi01
BorgOvermind said:
It's an improvement, but they are still (~5) years behind compared to the other 2 competitors when it comes to graphics.
There is only one other competitor when it comes to integrated graphics.
Posted on Reply
#11
yotano211
medi01 said:
There is only one other competitor when it comes to integrated graphics.
Is it ATI?
Posted on Reply
#12
Midland Dog
raja is doing something i guess, i bet that half the shit wont work, hey at least they will go back to solder when they find out that rajas hotter than curry architecture is too hot for tim, nah im pulling ya leg, i guess its good to see that mobile parts will at least be somewhat capable, i hope they can squeeze out 1030 level perf one day, we already know that intels igpus can clock, heck the intel hd 3000 in the i5 2435m shipped at 1.35ghz boost so maybe just maybe raja has been up to something
Posted on Reply
#13
ShurikN
londiste said:

What do you mean no one wants it? Raven Ridge has gathered quite a lot of positive feedback and with good reason.
That's because on Raven Ridge you can actually play some modern games.
Posted on Reply
#14
haxzion
after Intel stole our money, knowing their products are defective "Meltdown and Spectre" now they are releasing new stuff....
zero reliability
Posted on Reply
#15
Hugh Mungus
They're actually changing their iGPU? I nearly gave up hope, but here they are designing a GOOD one! Nice!
Posted on Reply
#16
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
Hugh Mungus said:
They're actually changing their iGPU? I nearly gave up hope, but here they are designing a GOOD one! Nice!
they had a 72 EU igpu with the P580
48 EUs is equal to 384 Shaders
72 EUs 576
Posted on Reply
#17
Hugh Mungus
T4C Fantasy said:
they had a 72 EU igpu with the P580
48 EUs is equal to 384 Shaders
72 EUs 576
I forgot about the high-end ones. Maybe they're just repurposing old iGPU designs on a better wafer then.
Posted on Reply
#18
Vya Domus
londiste said:

As far as performance goes, Intel's graphics are really not that bad.
By what standard ?

londiste said:

They are just small and somewhat underpowered.
They aren't small at all , they occupy nearly half of the die. There is no beating around the bush , Intel's integrated graphics are horrible. I often wonder why they don't just get a licence from ARM and be done with it.
Posted on Reply
#19
Kaotik
BorgOvermind said:
It's an improvement, but they are still (~5) years behind compared to the other 2 competitors when it comes to graphics.
Improvement to what? 384 ALUs / 48 EUs matches GT3 level (=Iris, Iris Plus) on current Intel IGP graphics and there's also GT4 level (Iris Pro) which has 576 ALUs / 72 EUs.
Posted on Reply
#20
_JP_
So, Iris is going to stop being niche-only?
Might be the first wise decision Intel has made this year. That could have been done since 2014, lol
Posted on Reply
#21
londiste
Vya Domus said:
By what standard ?
GT2 core configuration is 192:24:3
For comparison, Raven Ridges are 512:32:16 and 704:44:16
Vya Domus said:
They aren't small at all , they occupy nearly half of the die. There is no beating around the bush , Intel's integrated graphics are horrible. I often wonder why they don't just get a licence from ARM and be done with it.
1/3-ish. That includes all the media and display stuff.
https://en.wikichip.org/w/images/thumb/d/dc/kaby_lake_(quad_core)_(annotated).png/650px-kaby_lake_(quad_core)_(annotated).png

Why exactly are Intel's integrated graphics horrible?
Posted on Reply
#22
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
this is the difference intel needs for a GT2 to GT3e gpu
model of a broadwell mobile chip



Skylake GT4e
Posted on Reply
#23
Vya Domus
londiste said:

Why exactly are Intel's integrated graphics horrible?
They are slow and use too much space that could otherwise be used for wider cores or more of them. I wouldn't mind them putting basic display adapter functionalities in their chips but as of now they are sacrificing way too much for something that barley is a bit more than a display adapter. The aforementioned ARM GPUs are light years ahead of them.

They keep complicating their GPUs for things like compute since they are losing ground to Nvidia in the datacenter space. But the result is a cluterfuck of a chip than provides no real advatage over their competitors.

Did you know Intel has , ironically , the most efficient hardware for geometry shaders ? Geometry shaders are avoided like the plague by graphics programmers. Why are they wasting time developing these things if no one uses them ?
Posted on Reply
#24
lynx29
TheGuruStud said:
And what's funnier, NO ONE wants it. They keep wasting die space and power on it. Keep the low end crap for OEM CPUs and let the big boys play.

They'll never get it. I'm gonna call them Cisco.
I like what you are saying, and agree for the most part. Keep in mind my friend, we are a very niche community. I just built a new very cheap PC for my niece so she could play the Telltale games, Minecraft, Skyrim, etc she is 8 years old, so this amount of cheap finally made it possible for me to get her into PC gaming. (because she is not allowed to touch my 2 grand setup) lol, and I am a cheap skate Uncle. ;p

$99 2200G APU, MSI A320M mobo for $44, $34 after rebate. and one cheap stick of 8gb ddr4 ram at low speeds, but it won't matter to her. and i re-used an old PC case, an ancient PSU I had from like 8 years ago, and yeah... it came with its own really nice heatsink... so I mean not so bad really. especially since I can share my steam library with her since she lives with me and my parents. = she is set for awhile at least for very old games.
Posted on Reply
#25
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Intel sees justification to take advantage of an out of control GPU market. There is money to be made! :pimp:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment