The only reason I want iGPU is to get rid of dedicated GPU and still be able to play most game at 1080p easily. However I dont think that's the case even with 8700G. It cant even match RX580 from 2016. Why would I spent so much on the APU when you get more from RX580 easily.

Let the RX580 rest in peace,
newer title will work better with newer GPU, because they're more focus on optimize for new drivers.

it really depends on what games you're playing, for me im just happy with my 680m from lappy, it play most the games i have except some due to RAM limitation (Doom Eternal)

I plays most of my games in 1080p on my 4K monitor (FSR Sharpening strength 100%)

Boy arent you a little pissed because your fave gotten dissed in just about every tered and review and forums. Why need to go defend them so hard? They dont owe you anything. They are BAD JUST BAD, for general usage which majority of buyers use for, accept it.

You wanna talk about PBO? I shown u PBO sux
You wanna talk about efficiency? I shown u it sux vs past gen
You wanna talk about performance? I shown u it actually does worse in some
You wanna talk about linux user? I shown u it hardly even matters

And now you wanna talk about server and pro use? Wow how many people does that and what the majority of PC buyers use them for?

And weirdly you talking about single thread performance, but who does that for server or all core usage? I really doubt your real usage here too.

I get it you desperately need to find something to talk good about this underwhelmingly underwhelming and utterly disappointing CPU generation, its what you fanboys do. But try to look at it objectively. It has a generational leap of only 3-5% which harks back to the bad ol Intel 14++ days. If you want to shill at least get your narrative right and right now just about every review has nothing much good to say about it.

This is not a server CPU, its hardly a functional one with only 8 cores. You could argue that with the 99xx family but even that is disappointing against its 79xx predecessor in performance. AMD really drop the ball with this gen and its a disservice to new buyers or AMD fans to get them unless for that really niche application I mentioned.

Nvidia Optimus used to do that switchover seamlessly as my past laptop never had any issue of wrongly assigning which GPU to use when gaming (the GTX) or back in Windows (Intel igpu). I think that AMD shoulda gotten this sorted out by now right? Not sure with AMD but with Intel built in igpu has pass thru to the mobo HDMI for either igpu or DGPU usage.

Wow you can still play with 680m? My laptop with 660m was retired couple years ago since it could barely even run COD MWR

Here we go again, you got my point? You need judge it from different viewpoints. There are places where it shows good gain and it can be advocated for under such use cases and you denied those. It is exactly the same way where you ask people to go for 7800X3D for gaming, but for workloads that scales better with more cores, 7900 can be a good pick.

https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen-9600x-9700x/10
Take Python as an example. It is heavily used in data science / machine learning field. I have no problem recommending 9700X to those who want to target the machine for this kind of work.

Don't tell me yeah the industry uses TR / Epyc etc, this is for the workstation where engineer experiments things out before deploying the code to production in load balanced multiple instances. You could also ask nah, you are bullshitting, AI/ML uses GPU. The answer is, you need to do data preparation before passing the training to GPU. Wondering why Python shows so specific gain? It is "single threaded" due to GIL (Global intrepreter lock). Go ahead and deny Python.

The case is same with Node.js, where it's web server designs is on single thread event loop to process requests.

Next... let's go SVT-AV1. If someone is doing heavy AV1 CPU transcoding, usually with Handbrake (i.e. trying to minimize the video while keeping quality ok-ish), the AVX gain is there, it is cheaper & faster than 7900. Why not? But if you are doing x264/HEVC, just go 7900, the answer is simple.

From other productivity benchmarks, I have no problem recommending 9700X as a cost-effective server candidate. It can be useful to host in-house services in SME. It even has ECC where Intel deliberately masked it i5 or above level to push customers to Xeon. But... is there better other choices? Yes, let's have run some benchmarks against other and decide, I won't straight away say any is bad, but if that specific service is indeed running best in 9700X and that fits in customer budget, go ahead. There are some cases even people will use Intel N100 (yes, it is very very low performance, but the other factors such as form factor makes it good) as router.

Let's talk about your favourite Apple. M series is not right technically a server processor right? That doesn't stop people from using it to run CI/CD to run test / compile code with automation, and for that we call it as build server. You can rent some instances in AWS straight away and start using. Heck, there is no ECC RAM commonly found in server space, lacking in the Mac Mini!

The above are actually what is happening in the industry (yes, both Intel / AMD are milking hard the enterprise segment, consumer level gets dust due to the economic scale). Customers purchase machine just because they want to run very specific set of software. There is really companies who use commodity hardware by scale. They know what's the drawback and they have way to workaround them or just blatantly accept them since doesn't affect what they run. I believe you get the news of game company running into issue with 14900K as their game server, and that is an example.

Didn't you see that in earlier post I ask the other guy to go 7700? It is always by scenario basis which I have been telling, but you keep telling nah it is bad no matter how. Who is in denial now? Why are you so angry? Did AMD set your expectation wrongly?

Here's something to open your mind :
- https://www.youtube.com/@ServeTheHomeVideo/videos
- https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1915715

This post has been edited by kingkingyyk: Aug 17 2024, 11:51 PM

the games i play arent that demanding, mostly from hoyoverse, i can play cp2077 as well, everythng low in GQ.
nowadays i dont really buying new games, except those like Robocop, Talos of principle, and Dead space ect,

But Dead Space i would wait for new lappy, my Lenovo lappy is reach 2 years pf usage, battery already degraded.

I think that only works with lappy, for desktop seamlessly switching i dont think its possible,
I used to play with Nvidia + Radeon gpu, thing works like Radeon for rendering but gpu processing done in Nvidia gpu.

And PhysX + Radeon ect, it was donkey years ago, it worked but nvidia disabled it and i sold my older geforce gpu off.

For new lappy i dont have preference, lappy with Radeon dGPU is very rare, mostly dominated by RTX

Yes there is nothing else you can talk about. Still with the Linux usage in server application. Continue to harp on the 5% use of a CPU while the 95% general public doesnt care and to them this is a poor deal.

Here's something to open your mind :










This post has been edited by babylon52281: Aug 18 2024, 11:08 AM

Here we go again :
Sigh.

When you mention cp2077 being playable I just realised your referring to Radeon 680m circa 2022 rather than Kepler GTX 680m circa 2012.

But yeah for newer games igpu just isnt good enough and Im surprised you could game with cp2077.

Which is why I said you should open your mind.

But you never showed that it sucks in every single aspect? I did show there are some use cases where it performs well (prove by contradiction) and worth recommending.

Lol GTX 680m probably can plays only very old games,

My lappy soc is R7 6800HS, iGP is 680M, and i won the bet anyway since i didnt know the igp capabilities,

Some of us already learned the lesson. Never buy products at launch. Let them finish their "beta" test on consumers first.

This post has been edited by TristanX: Aug 18 2024, 04:09 PM

Laptop you cant do much unless your using external GPU dock

Yea but problem is Ryzen constantly been in beta test mode until next gen comes to replace and then this cycle restarts....

The real limit is the ram, 16gb I can't even launch doom eternal even at 480p, it keep saying ram not enough

Older titles are fine though

I suspect insufficient RAM buffer bcoz your iGPU ady start to makan 4-6 GB then not much left on system RAM to load the game properly.

I don't remember there's setting for vram in bios, Lenovo efi setting is very bare unlike asus
My Asus mini PC with r7 5700u can set vram for the igp.

Another sus is windows 11, and the truck load of background services...

This post has been edited by 1024kbps: Aug 19 2024, 12:37 PM