Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel UHD Graphics 630 "Coffee Lake" On Linux

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    What about 2160p video decoding tests together with CPU load? VP9 (Youtube) and HEVC/H.265 (all other sources) come to mind first.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by andyprough View Post
      duby229 - so how much more money should us non-gamers pay for our cpu's so that the gamers get a nice, out of the box experience?

      What will we call it? The Intel gamer tax?
      Don't feed the troll.

      Comment


      • #13
        Noone refered to that "alpha" thing that is present in the intel DRM even for latest git code and prevents this to run in a plug n play scenario. It is mostly obvious that intel rushed to put out an answer to AMD's Ryzen parts that they didn't even change the code to take those gpu parts out of alpha state although they are the same with the previous ones from the past Lake generation.
        Of course these igpus are useless for modern gaming something that it is not fact for the AMD side although for the moment even with the excavator CPU cores they cannot match intel's CPU performance. AMD has ATI and focuses on modern graphics systems that's why their igpus are way faster than those intel makes. The CPU part was AMD's target to improve and I believe they suceeded this in 2017 and also made intel put out rebranded of course intentionally NOT compatible with previous CPUs chipsets, and leave driver codes untouched in order to make the release as quick as they could.
        Well done intel! I am really happy that you seem in a state of panic although your cpus are still faster, and now with more cores, but not as more fast as in the near past and many times beaten by AMD counterparts.
        Also I didn't know they fired 15000 employees! Historically moves like these in IT space shows signs of big trouble in such companies.
        Perhaps todays Lake is what they could squeeze most out of their architecture ( for core count and IPC perf) and they rushed to put it out to make some profit before AMD puts out ZEN2 which they know it will smash them? ZEN is a new platform with a lot of room for improvement in all areas and considering also that ZEN1 upgraders won't have to change their motherboards and RAM for the new CPUs.
        Well just some of my thoughts, thank you for your time...

        Comment


        • #14
          Michael please add tests for h.264, h.265, vp9 in 8 and 10 Bit to your test profiles. With CPU load and watt measuring.
          That would be really interesting to know if one should upgrade their current CPU/APU (i5 Haswell in my case).

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by baka0815 View Post
            Michael please add tests for h.264, h.265, vp9 in 8 and 10 Bit to your test profiles. With CPU load and watt measuring.
            That would be really interesting to know if one should upgrade their current CPU/APU (i5 Haswell in my case).
            New additions to the Phoronix Test Suite are always welcome by the community. Thanks.
            Michael Larabel
            https://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by duby229 View Post
              It barely ran only one of the modern 1080p games at 20fps. It's not even fair to call it HD let alone UHD. At bare minimum it's false advertising.

              EDIT: It's all good though, I'll get a brand new round of video card upgrades after people buy these and realize they didn't get what they paid for. Thanks Intel!! And it'll be totally obvious because these products are gonna be brought home with brand new 4k monitors...
              good enough for 4k OpenOffice spreadsheet though ;-)

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Spooktra View Post
                It amazes me that almost every single site that tests a video card completely ignores the "video" part and instead tests gaming. The benefit of Intel's iGPU's is in it's decode and encode capabilities; they support hardware encoding of mepg-2, h264, hevc, hevc 10bit, vp8, vp9 (<--since Kaby Lake), aac and mjpeg as well as BT2020 and HDR decode and encode and vp9 10 bit and 12 bit decoding.

                These are potent chips for encoding video into delivery and archival formats, yet everyone ignores it.

                On a side note, it's too bad that Intel didn't add a relatively big L4 like the Iris Pro graphics, with just 128MB of cache the difference in some games is substantial, imagine if Intel was to add a 1GB L4.
                Do more people want to play games, or encode video? Hm, … 🤔🤔

                Comment


                • #18
                  Very disappointing.
                  I don't expect it to do 4K gaming, but I do expect it be a incremental update that performs faster than its predecessor, even if only slightly so.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by eydee View Post
                    Still beaten by 10-year-old mid-range legacy GPUs from AMD and nvidia. These things are just not suitable for anything 3D.
                    Depending on your definition of "3D", they're perfectly capable of running desktop compositing smoothly, as well as most applications with 3D elements that aren't too dependent on texture quality or polygon count (like CNC software, Google Earth, Adobe products, etc). Gaming is pretty much the lowest priority to Intel's GPUs, as they should be. Intel's GPUs are adequate for what they're designed for, which as a result makes them modestly efficient.

                    If Intel is to ever make a GPU targeted toward gamers, it ought to be a discrete GPU.

                    Originally posted by Spooktra View Post
                    It amazes me that almost every single site that tests a video card completely ignores the "video" part and instead tests gaming. The benefit of Intel's iGPU's is in it's decode and encode capabilities; they support hardware encoding of mepg-2, h264, hevc, hevc 10bit, vp8, vp9 (<--since Kaby Lake), aac and mjpeg as well as BT2020 and HDR decode and encode and vp9 10 bit and 12 bit decoding.

                    These are potent chips for encoding video into delivery and archival formats, yet everyone ignores it.
                    It's not just Intel GPUs, but AMD and Nvidia chips too. For example, I have a socket AM1 Athlon with HD 8400 graphics. The platform as a whole is completely useless for gaming. That's fine - that isn't why I bought it, but there are so few benchmarks out there for video transcoding. Of the ones that do exist, they were only tested once and never again after further driver patches. I've considered getting a 4K display, but I held off because I wasn't totally sure if the GPU could handle 4K playback (at the very least, I know for a fact it can't support 4K@60FPS, because the HDMI port doesn't support 4K@60Hz displays).
                    Last edited by schmidtbag; 06 October 2017, 09:38 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by rene View Post

                      Do more people want to play games, or encode video? Hm, … 🤔🤔
                      Let's ignore the encode video part and ask do more people want to play games or watch video? But, based on my experience reading through various forums it seems that encoding video has gained significant traction as evidenced by the fact that Nvidia, AMD and Intel offer hardware based encoders and have done so for years.

                      They are called video cards, not gaming cards, and I think most people would pitch a fit if their shiny new video card allowed them to play games at resolutions their monitor doesn't support but didn't allow them to play youtube videos encodes with vp9 or hevc or h264 smoothly.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X