Tuesday, August 24th 2021

AMD Socket AM5 "Zen 4" Processors to have RDNA2 Integrated Graphics Across the Lineup

The first desktop processors to implement AMD's "Zen 4" microarchitecture will feature integrated graphics as standard across the lineup, according to a Chips and Cheese report citing leaked AMD design documents. Currently, most of the Socket AM4 desktop processor lineup lacks integrated graphics, and specialized "G" SKUs with integrated graphics dot it. These SKUs almost always come with compromises in CPU performance or PCIe I/O. With its 5 nm "Raphael" Socket AM5 desktop processor, AMD is planning to change this, in a bid to match up to Intel on the universality of integrated graphics.

Built in the 5 nm silicon fabrication process, the "Raphael" silicon combines "Zen 4" CPU cores along with an iGPU based on the RDNA2 graphics architecture. This would be the first time AMD updated the SIMD architecture of its Ryzen iGPUs since 2017. The RDNA2-based iGPU will come with a more advanced DCN (Display CoreNext) component than current RDNA2-based discrete GPUs, with some SKUs even featuring DisplayPort 2.0 support, besides HDMI 2.1. By the time "Raphael" is out (2022-23), it is expected that USB4 type-C would gain popularity, and mainstream motherboards as well as pre-built desktops could ship with USB4 with DisplayPort 2.0 passthrough. AMD relies on a discrete USB4 controller with PCI-Express 4.0 x4 wiring, for its first Socket AM5 platform.
Sources: Chips and Cheese, VideoCardz
Add your own comment

51 Comments on AMD Socket AM5 "Zen 4" Processors to have RDNA2 Integrated Graphics Across the Lineup

#1
ixi
If this will be capable to give more than 60 fps on full hd while setinngs are medium/high on current top titles. Then I'll take it.
Posted on Reply
#2
ratirt
All CPUs with graphics. I don't know how I feel about it. As long as it is efficient and does not bring the cores down I'm OK with it.
Posted on Reply
#3
ixi
ratirtAll CPUs with graphics. I don't know how I feel about it. As long as it is efficient and does not bring the cores down I'm OK with it.
I guess on performance cpu the iGPU will be weaker while on "G" series stronger, but we shall see.
Posted on Reply
#4
ratirt
ixiI guess on performance cpu the iGPU will be weaker while on "G" series stronger, but we shall see.
I know but it does take space nonetheless. AMD can always use that space for something else than graphics.
Posted on Reply
#5
Hyderz
keen to see the performance of the new ryzen lineup
Posted on Reply
#6
Forza.Milan
ixiIf this will be capable to give more than 60 fps on full hd while setinngs are medium/high on current top titles. Then I'll take it.
Buy discrete GPU.
Posted on Reply
#7
ixi
Forza.MilanBuy discrete GPU.
400e for full hd gaming? How about no, maybe!
Posted on Reply
#8
tabascosauz
ixiI guess on performance cpu the iGPU will be weaker while on "G" series stronger, but we shall see.
ratirtI know but it does take space nonetheless. AMD can always use that space for something else than graphics.
I'm thinking the same, similar to what Intel is doing for Rocket Lake, Tiger Lake H45, and LGA1700 Alder Lake. A cut down, acceptable iGPU with up-to-date arch and features so you can always use it in a pinch (or for a second monitor like on Intel for years) but relatively small so as not to occupy too much die space. Otherwise, it makes very little sense to shove a larger iGPU in there that just reduces yields and most "performance" SKU buyers will never care about for gaming. Perhaps the new arch, process and DDR5 can enable similar or slightly better performance than Vega 8 at better efficiency (not that it's currently a problem, even heavily OC'd 7nm Vega 8 sips power) and die size.

Makes little sense to suddenly switch to chiplets for mobile, so probably AMD is continuing on the -G APUs as essentially socketed and higher clocked mobile parts with more space to dedicate to an actually interesting iGPU.

And it sounds like chiplets aren't going away, so unless there are radical improvements in off-die IF latency, current Vega 8 (and future APUs) still has the advantage of being monolithic. Vega 8 doesn't get very hot, but the rest of the chip helps sink heat away from the iGPU when it is pulling ~30W.
Posted on Reply
#9
londiste
ratirtI know but it does take space nonetheless. AMD can always use that space for something else than graphics.
They could use that space for profit :D
Posted on Reply
#10
Kohl Baas
I'm not sure if the GPU will have that much of a performance-hit on the CPU. Especially if they really pushing the TDP to 170W without raising the corecount above 16. That's a lot of headroom to a GPU.

Imagine a standard 65W CPU paired with a 105W GPU. And that's without any powerplay between the two.You can put there a 150W GPU and let smart power-management do the rest.
Posted on Reply
#11
ratirt
Kohl BaasI'm not sure if the GPU will have that much of a performance-hit on the CPU. Especially if they really pushing the TDP to 170W without raising the corecount above 16. That's a lot of headroom to a GPU.

Imagine a standard 65W CPU paired with a 105W GPU. And that's without any powerplay between the two.You can put there a 150W GPU and let smart power-management do the rest.
I would still worry about the heat this GPU would give and considering it is still a chiplet design it might be really hard to dissipating the heat. I assume these will not be monolithic but who knows at this point.
Posted on Reply
#12
Outback Bronze
Seems smart, they don't want the opposition to get revenue by buying a low end GPU if needed.

Or buying an Intel CPU with integrated.
Posted on Reply
#13
ZoneDymo
cool but they really need to add things akin to quicksync to have general value from it imo
Posted on Reply
#15
Mussels
Moderprator
I just want the ability to use my onboard graphics (AMD freesync) paired with the nvidia as the renderer

it's been half done over the years, make it the default!
Posted on Reply
#16
robb
ixiIf this will be capable to give more than 60 fps on full hd while setinngs are medium/high on current top titles. Then I'll take it.
why in the hell would they waste that much space on graphics to do that? they have real APUs if that is what you want. I think the whole point here is to just have basic video so you can survive when in between cards plus some people care nothing about gaming and just want a good cpu and would love not having to go buy a gpu just to use it.
Posted on Reply
#17
Wirko
tabascosauzMakes little sense to suddenly switch to chiplets for mobile, so probably AMD is continuing on the -G APUs as essentially socketed and higher clocked mobile parts with more space to dedicate to an actually interesting iGPU.

And it sounds like chiplets aren't going away, so unless there are radical improvements in off-die IF latency, current Vega 8 (and future APUs) still has the advantage of being monolithic. Vega 8 doesn't get very hot, but the rest of the chip helps sink heat away from the iGPU when it is pulling ~30W.
You're suggesting that AMD is going to have two distinct product lines for the desktop, one monolithic and the other made with chiplets? It could be, and it raises the question: where will they put the iGPU? On one CCD? Both CCDs? The I/O die? A separate chiplet, possibly?
Posted on Reply
#18
tabascosauz
WirkoYou're suggesting that AMD is going to have two distinct product lines for the desktop, one monolithic and the other made with chiplets? It could be, and it raises the question: where will they put the iGPU? On one CCD? Both CCDs? The I/O die? A separate chiplet, possibly?
Why would it go on the CCDs? :confused: the point of going to chiplets was to eliminate unnecessary BS so Ryzen, Threadripper and Epyc with different I/O could scale off the same chiplet. Upcoming 3D cache will be stacked on the CCDs already, and the CCDs already struggle thermally so no sense in making it even worse.

Could be either I/O die or separate, both would have their advantages. But from how AMD APUs and all desktop Intel are designed though, probably I/O die right next to I/O and UMC and system agent stuff.

They already have 2 separate product lines on desktop..........Matisse + Renoir, Vermeer + Cezanne. AMD wants to continue to expand laptop marketshare so monolithic APUs are here to stay, and the roadmaps point to cutting-edge iGPUs staying on APUs like they always have. This chiplet iGPU is probably analogous to 32EU Xe, and Intel is reserving its best full iGPU for the parts that actually need it (mobile Tiger/Alder Lake), no reason why AMD wouldn't do the same.
Posted on Reply
#19
INSTG8R
Vanguard Beta Tester
I mean if anything it will offer parity with Intel it’s hasn’t had. But like Intel went the other way and started offering iGPU less SKUs I would like to think AMD will continue to offer without as always with iGPU SKUs options. With them getting Zen “all in order” now they are just “filling a gap” Intel could only fill.
Posted on Reply
#20
Mussels
Moderprator
I can totally see two product stacks (and we see 3 in the leak)

E series (45W and under 8 cores with basic GPU, maybe a single CCX lineup?)
G series (65-95W, strong IGP)
X series (65W-170W) - basic GPU, all the cores and performance
Posted on Reply
#21
nienorgt
Finally!
The reason why I went with an Intel CPU was to have an iGPU without compromise on the CPU part.
Anyone who have got a dead GFX card will understand how nice it is to have a fallback option.
Posted on Reply
#22
Turmania
There is a huge market and big piece of the pie for these cpu's with basic integrated graphics and basically Intel has a lions bite of it. So it makes sense in many aspects for AMD to do so and to be honest they have been pretty late.
Posted on Reply
#23
ARF
TurmaniaThere is a huge market and big piece of the pie for these cpu's with basic integrated graphics and basically Intel has a lions bite of it. So it makes sense in many aspects for AMD to do so and to be honest they have been pretty late.
AMD has offered processors with integrated graphics since 2011. Where have you been meanwhile?

Today, AMD the only thing AMD wants is to limit its sales numbers because the performance advantages related to the MORE Cores will suddenly evaporate.
Posted on Reply
#24
londiste
ARFAMD has offered processors with integrated graphics since 2011. Where have you been meanwhile?
Today, AMD the only thing AMD wants is to limit its sales numbers because the performance advantages related to the MORE Cores will suddenly evaporate.
Most Intel CPUs since Sandy Bridge have been with iGPU (with the exception of F-models since 9000-series). Most AMD Zen CPUs have been without iGPU.

AMD APUs have been inferior to other AMD CPUs in some way as well. The 8 cores that was Zen's main argument did not exist in 2000 and 3000 series APUs. 4000-series APUs were officially OEM-only and even 5000-series APUs suffer from lower Cache.
Posted on Reply
#25
Punkenjoy
That make sense

They are suppose to move the I/O die to TMSC 7nm. That will leave them some room to implement a small RDNA2 GPU.

That would help them to get some feature like quicksync. Things that AMD really need to improve.

But i won't think those would be super powerful. But who know, with chiplets, they could design a specific SKU with a larger RDNA2 GPU for that reason.

It would need some infinity cache on to have enough bandwidth.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Copyright © 2004-2021 www.techpowerup.com. All rights reserved.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners.