Hacker News Reader

Comment by wffurr | Hacker News Reader

“dGPU” usually means “discrete GPU”. Do you mean “iGPU” for “integrated GPU” instead?

Strix Halo is also being marketed for gaming but the performance profile is all wrong for that. The CPU is too fast and the iGPU still not strong enough.

I am sure it’s amazing at matmul though.

View on HN

Yes, I intended to use the term "discrete GPU" before using "dGPU" as a shorthand for that exact reason (in the second paragraph). I now see that I edited the first paragraph to use "dGPU" without first defining it as such.

I also agree that they aren't for gaming (something I know little about). My comment was with respect to compute workloads, but I never specified that. Apologies.

I have one. Framework Desktop mainboard that I put into a larger ITX chassis and regular power supply.

It's fine for 1440p gaming. I don't use it for that, but it would not be a bother if that was all I had.

It’s fine for 1440p gaming but you way overpaid for the GPU versus a discrete GPU and a lower end CPU with socketed RAM.

The CPU power of it and the high bandwidth integrated RAM aren’t the right performance trade offs for a gaming workload. Does it work for it? Sure. But you also have a bunch of extra hardware you don’t really need for it.

I bought it for AI, that fact that i can also use it for gaming is a nice bonus (same with the RTX 3090 previously).

From what I've seen the gaming benchmarks are fantastic. Beats the mobile 5070 for some games and settings, or slightly behind on others. While being very far ahead of every other iGPU.

I have a laptop with an Nvidia GPU. Ruins battery life and makes it run very hot. I'd pay a lot for a powerful iGPU.

I have a framework Desktop and it is a fine machine for gaming as well. It won't beat discrete GPUs but you can run Cyberpunk 2077 at max settings at 1080p and still be above 60fps.

Edit: it does feel like a rtx4060 performance wise so it's not far from some discrete GPUs.

As a casual gamer I'm already okay with the RTX 3050 dGPU on my laptop. Reports put Strix Halo at RTX 4070 level which is massive for an iGPU and certainly allows for 2k single screen gaming. Hardcore gaming will always require a desktop with PCIe boards.

Strix Halo is nowhere near RTX 4070 (desktop at least, not familiar with laptop GPUs).

Maybe there's been some selective optimization and careful marketing but to even be in that ballpark for some games now means that more is coming.

https://www.techspot.com/news/106835-amd-ryzen-strix-halo-la...

This link is a terrible source. In one of the graphs 4060 is faster than 4070. This speaks to the quality of testing.

In some power constrained scenarios that sort of thing is often petty reproducible.

Especially if the different SKUs have different power budgets. Laptop GPU naming and performance is a bit of a mess, as in the example shown (the 4060 on the Asus TUF Gaming A16 has a limit of 140w GPU+CPU, while the 4070 on the Asus Proart PX13 has 115w GPU+CPU - and even that is a "custom" non-default mode with 95w being the actual out-of-the-box limit).

With wildly varying power profiles laptop graphics need to be compared by chassis (and the cooling/power supply that implies) as much as by GPU SKU.

That just proves the point about the source, right?

No, it disproves the misconception that GPUs with the same model number will perform the same on all devices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com