Well, the second one has to be just using HD630. I don't think anyone expected the Intel IGP to keep up with the AMD APU graphics. They never have, and it's never made much difference.
The first one shows a tie with a GT1030, and that may be a best case slide. Or it may not.
It is also emphasizing the power use. So it appears to basically be claiming the same performance as a GT1030 while using less power.
You are not thinking that line of thought through very well. Prior to Ryzen APUs, these were basically the options:
1). Buy an AMD APU, which currently is Bristol Ridge. Although with an excellent integrated GPU and efficiency, it lacked the CPU grunt to compete under the reality of competing market conditions in general computing.
2). Buy an intel APU with the compute grunt on the CPU side and suffer the consequences of using an intel GPU.
3). Buy an intel APU and attach a discrete GPU.
4). Buy an AMD APU and attach a discrete GPU.
And so from those options it's clear to see why AMD's strong GPU in construction core APUs wouldn't make much of a difference. Consumers and OEMs were buying the intel APU and having to attach a discrete GPU if they wanted to be able to do anything with satisfactory results besides watching a video. If playing a game wasn't a requirement, consumers and OEMs were also buying intel APUs, again because of the compute performance.
Obviously it is a completely different paradigm with Ryzen APUs, since as everyone knows, they have virtually matched the compute performance of the competition. Consumers now have the viable option of purchasing a Ryzen APU, or purchase the intel APU and attach an entry level GPU for the same performance at higher cost, higher TDP and poorer software compared to Radeon Settings. In the case of an intel + Nvidia combination, that also means multiple drivers and software packages to manage.