AMD discussion

CountMike said:

If you mean Max CPU BOOST Clock Override, try on auto.

I did, and I lowered SOC to 1.05 in BIOS

ignatzatsonic said:

What is the likelihood that over the next year or two, AMD will begin to release upper level processors with integrated graphics?

5% chance? 50% chance? Anything rumored AT ALL? Or will their upper level stuff continue to require a discrete graphics card?

I don't mean absolute top of the line, but something considerably stronger than the current integrated graphics line.

Their current processors with integrated graphics are considerably slower than Intel counterparts.

I'm perfectly willing to buy AMD if they matched Intel in this respect.

Any conjecture?

Chance is pretty good from what I can see, there's new generation of GPUs coming out in at least 7nm technology, 5 and 3nm in the works and from another side, Ryzen are multi chip modules, shouldn't be difficult to ad another chip for graphics. Ryzen mobile chips 4000 already have it. https://www.amd.com/en/products/ryzen-processors-laptop

ignatzatsonic said:

Thanks for that, Count.

I'd hope you or someone can post any additional news on the desktop integrated graphics area. I've never owned AMD primarily because I won't use a video card.

AMD had CPUs with integrated graphics, they call them APU. like PassMark - AMD A10-7850K APU - Price performance comparison for instance. Even Ryzen has them, those are processors wit G at end. Problem is that CPUs and integrated graphics are not of highest tier, although graphics in them are much better than in Intel integrated chips. Ryzen 3400g is best one of those right now.

ignatzatsonic said:

Yeah, AMD does have better integrated graphics than Intel. I'm aware of the G processors. I'll recheck, but I think I did look at the 3400G.

Problem is, none of my tasks on a PC can take advantage of AMD's superior integrated graphics. Intel integrated is plenty for my needs.

I choose Intel only because the AMD integrated graphics CPUs are weaker than Intel for my purposes. That does matter to me.

Ryzen 3400G is already quite better than that 6600K AMD Ryzen 5 3400G vs Intel Core i5-6600K @ 3.50GHz [cpubenchmark.net] by PassMark Software CPU and GPU.

pparks1 said:

I like the concept on onboard video working on the CPU lines because motherboards often contain the video outputs already and it's a bit of a bummer that they cannot be used when you don't need advanced video capabilities.

Adding a $50 video card is doable, but most times these cards have legacy connections like VGA and DVI. It would be nice to have low end cards with HDMI and DisplayPort to hook up to modern monitors.

Once upon a time, there were MBs with own graphics mostly included with chipset.