If AMD makes APUs, and an APU=CPU+GPU, then why do AMD APUs have GPUs on the motherboard?

[PS85]

I'm looking at some HP maintenance manuals, and the heatsink clearly covers both the A10 or A12 APU plus a separate graphics processor on the "system board", (motherboard). Also, I saw a Dell with an AMD A12 and separate AMD graphics card with 2GB of dedicated memory on it.

Can someone explain? Because it sure looks to me that what AMD makes are separate CPUs and GPUs.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Can someone explain? Because it sure looks to me that what AMD makes are separate CPUs and GPUs.

Same reason why you see separate video cards on Intel systems with iGPUs.

While for integrated graphics AMD APUs are pretty good, they pale in comparison even compared to low cost graphics cards. So some systems just feature a separate, faster GPU.

Sometimes though manufacturers put equivalent performing separate GPUs for other reasons. I think one of them has to do with perception.

 

[PS85]

Thank you for your answer. I thought it might be something like that, the AMD processors having only a relatively elementary video system on the main processor chip, but some writers are saying that it is not fair to compare Intel and AMD processors, since Intels are CPUs and AMDs are APUs. But if the video part of the processor is only a small part of the AMD processor design, then it seems to me it would be fair to do comparisons between Intel and AMD processors.

For instance, the HD Pavilion line is a mid price line, not an expensive one by any means. Yet, the maintenance manual for the HP Pavilion 17 ar(00 thru 99) models show the following lineup of AMD processors and integrated video cards. As you can see, all the video cards share memory with the main CPU systems, and this is just a mid level system:

So I think it is fair to compare the AMD chips with the Intel chips, since the video portion of the AMD processors seems to be elementary.

 

[lightmanek]

Thank you for your answer. I thought it might be something like that, the AMD processors having only a relatively elementary video system on the main processor chip, but some writers are saying that it is not fair to compare Intel and AMD processors, since Intels are CPUs and AMDs are APUs. But if the video part of the processor is only a small part of the AMD processor design, then it seems to me it would be fair to do comparisons between Intel and AMD processors.

For instance, the HD Pavilion line is a mid price line, not an expensive one by any means. Yet, the maintenance manual for the HP Pavilion 17 ar(00 thru 99) models show the following lineup of AMD processors and integrated video cards. As you can see, all the video cards share memory with the main CPU systems, and this is just a mid level system:

So I think it is fair to compare the AMD chips with the Intel chips, since the video portion of the AMD processors seems to be elementary.

None of the systems you have listed above have separate graphics chip on the motherboard. All of them have only AMD Radeon graphics build in to CPU. What gives it away, apart from just reading AMD processor model specifications, is UMA video memory description.
AMD Radeon R3, R5 and R7 are graphics chips fully integrated into processor, same as Intel HD630 or similar.
Hope this clears few things for you.

 

[LTC8K6]

9720P has R7 512:32:8 graphics at 758mhz.

 

[nathanddrews]

For what it's worth, "APU" is just an AMD-specific marketing term for "built-in graphics", or CPU+IGP. It is completely appropriate to compare directly to Intel HD Graphics, no matter what those writers say. Traditionally, AMD APUs have the graphics performance and features of low-end discrete graphics cards of the same era ($40-70 range). This doesn't sound impressive until you realize that they typically outperform Intel HD Graphics by orders of magnitude. Intel IGP has always been poor for gaming, despite Intel's marketing.

Check out benchmarks Notebookcheck and videos on YouTube such as RandomGamingInHD, LowSpecGamer, etc. if you want to see exactly how AMD APUs and Intel HD Graphics perform and what tweaks can be used to improve performance.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Order of magnitude definition: 10x

No, its not 10x better, it's about 2x.

UMA stands for Unified Memory Access, so-called because the CPU and GPU share the same memory, which in this case is system memory.

 

[LTC8K6]

For what it's worth, "APU" is just an AMD-specific marketing term for "built-in graphics", or CPU+IGP. It is completely appropriate to compare directly to Intel HD Graphics, no matter what those writers say. Traditionally, AMD APUs have the graphics performance and features of low-end discrete graphics cards of the same era ($40-70 range). This doesn't sound impressive until you realize that they typically outperform Intel HD Graphics by orders of magnitude. Intel IGP has always been poor for gaming, despite Intel's marketing.

Check out benchmarks Notebookcheck and videos on YouTube such as RandomGamingInHD, LowSpecGamer, etc. if you want to see exactly how AMD APUs and Intel HD Graphics perform and what tweaks can be used to improve performance.

Should add that Intel's IGP apparently holds close to 70% of the overall computer graphics market.

 

[coercitiv]

Should add that Intel's IGP apparently holds close to 70% of the overall computer graphics market.

Should add that an AMD GPU will power Intel's first high performance graphics product.

 

[LTC8K6]

Should add that an AMD GPU will power Intel's first high performance graphics product.

Small niche product though. And HD630 is with it.

 

[nathanddrews]

Should add that Intel's IGP apparently holds close to 70% of the overall computer graphics market.

I'm sure we could populate this thread with all sorts of useless data, but the OP didn't ask about sales numbers.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'd call it medium performance graphics for KL-G:

Graphics

• 9 Display outputs available
• Integrated HD Graphics 630 (Gen9.5 GT2)
  • 3 Displays
  • Base frequency of 350 MHz
  • Burst frequency of 1.1 GHz
• Discrete Vega-based GPUs
  • Custom Radeon RX Vega M Graphics
    • 6 Displays
    • Radeon RX Vega M GH
      • 24 Compute Units
      • 1,536 Stream processors, 64 pix/clk (ROPs), 96 texture units
      • 3.7 TFLOPS peak performance
    • Radeon RX Vega M GL
      • 20 Compute Units
      • 1,280 Stream processors, 32 pix/clk (ROPs), 80 texture units
      • 2.6 TFLOPS peak performance

 

[LTC8K6]

I'm sure we could populate this thread with all sorts of useless data, but the OP didn't ask about sales numbers.

Well, you did mention Intel's marketing and I was pointing out how popular Intel's IGP has been/is despite it's relatively poor performance.

I replied to you, not the OP.

 

[formulav8]

Should add that Intel's IGP apparently holds close to 70% of the overall computer graphics market.

OK? It doesn't make them good. They currently make like the worst performing graphics in pc's.

 

[LTC8K6]

OK? It doesn't make them good. They currently make like the worst performing graphics in pc's.

Absolutely no one even hinted that Intel's IGP was good, though.

 

[TheELF]

For what it's worth, "APU" is just an AMD-specific marketing term for "built-in graphics", or CPU+IGP. It is completely appropriate to compare directly to Intel HD Graphics, no matter what those writers say. Traditionally, AMD APUs have the graphics performance and features of low-end discrete graphics cards of the same era ($40-70 range). This doesn't sound impressive until you realize that they typically outperform Intel HD Graphics by orders of magnitude. Intel IGP has always been poor for gaming, despite Intel's marketing.

Check out benchmarks Notebookcheck and videos on YouTube such as RandomGamingInHD, LowSpecGamer, etc. if you want to see exactly how AMD APUs and Intel HD Graphics perform and what tweaks can be used to improve performance.

" APU is just an AMD-specific marketing term for "built-in graphics" "
No it's not,it means Accelerated Processing Unit, back in the nineties both intel and amd came to the conclusion that more cores wont add anything significant to the table compared to the awe-inspiring power of the GPU (yes even back then) .
It's not just (basic or not) graphics to display windows and whatnot,it's a co-processor for 3d rendering, video converting,en/de coding and anything else that can be run through gpgpu.

This doesn't sound impressive until you realize that they typically outperform Intel HD Graphics by orders of magnitude. Intel IGP has always been poor for gaming, despite Intel's marketing.
But as a CPU accelerator intels iGPUs are much better,providing x264 and x265 encoding with insane speeds and because they are actually made to run both the CPU and the GPU at full speed they actually do accelerate the work done by your CPU,while APUs most of the times (if not always) throttle one component to run the other at full speed.

Yes they do suck for gaming though.

 

[nathanddrews]

No it's not,it means Accelerated Processing Unit, back in the nineties both intel and amd came to the conclusion that more cores wont add anything significant to the table compared to the awe-inspiring power of the GPU (yes even back then) .

I get what you're saying, but don't kill the messenger.

It's not just (basic or not) graphics to display windows and whatnot,it's a co-processor for 3d rendering, video converting,en/de coding and anything else that can be run through gpgpu.

This is no different than any GPU.

But as a CPU accelerator intels iGPUs are much better,providing x264 and x265 encoding with insane speeds and because they are actually made to run both the CPU and the GPU at full speed they actually do accelerate the work done by your CPU,while APUs most of the times (if not always) throttle one component to run the other at full speed.
Yes they do suck for gaming though.

I was only specifically referring to gaming, but since you brought up video encoding: Quick Sync is faster, but lesser quality when used in common applications compared to pure CPU rendering with many fast cores. QS =/= x26. I think you meant H.26.

 

[PS85]

I thought the graphics would be done by the A12 or A10 too, but the maintenance manual for the HP Pavilion 17ar clearly shows a graphics co processor under the heat sink:

The model, presently sold at Walmart, has an A10 processor, 8GB RAM, R7 graphics and a 17.3 inch Full HD IPS screen. On the Walmart display, it was located right near a 15 inch Dell with an AMD A12, 12GB RAM, an AMD graphics card with 2GB dedicated memory and a Full HD IPS screen. These two models by far had the best graphics at Walmart and they were AMD powered. Using my usual comparison video, I would say the Dell with the dedicated memory had a tiny, infinitessimal edge over the HP with the integrated graphics memory, but I had to look at the same scene on the two computers over and over to detect it. So a tiny edge goes to Dell with the dedicated memory, but it's more theoretical than actual.

By all means, you guys can feel free to talk about graphics and various advantages in this thread. I'm presently using an old XP relic, and this pre-purchase investigation is a learning experience for me about graphics, etc. I didn't even know what a Full HD or an IPS screen was before 3 weeks ago.

 

[lightmanek]

Manuals are know to have graphs and layout drawings showing full configurations, but in all likelihood, when you take your HP Pavillion apart, all you find in place of dedicated graphics chip, will be soldering points.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I'm looking at some HP maintenance manuals, and the heatsink clearly covers both the A10 or A12 APU plus a separate graphics processor on the "system board", (motherboard). Also, I saw a Dell with an AMD A12 and separate AMD graphics card with 2GB of dedicated memory on it.

Can someone explain? Because it sure looks to me that what AMD makes are separate CPUs and GPUs.

At least with Kaveri, AMD had a devil of a time convincing OEMs to sell their APUs without an added dGPU. Sometimes dual graphics was available and sometimes not.

It seems like the OEMs either wanted to spread out thermal dissipation between two different hotspots, or they just didn't trust the APUs to stay at an acceptable clockspeed or . . . whatever. I'm pretty sure Carrizo had the same problem in laptop configurations.

It's stupid but at least it lets OEMs take comfort in their single-channel memory configurations not (necessarily) ruining GPU performance.

 

[LTC8K6]

I thought the graphics would be done by the A12 or A10 too, but the maintenance manual for the HP Pavilion 17ar clearly shows a graphics co processor under the heat sink:

The model, presently sold at Walmart, has an A10 processor, 8GB RAM, R7 graphics and a 17.3 inch Full HD IPS screen. On the Walmart display, it was located right near a 15 inch Dell with an AMD A12, 12GB RAM, an AMD graphics card with 2GB dedicated memory and a Full HD IPS screen. These two models by far had the best graphics at Walmart and they were AMD powered. Using my usual comparison video, I would say the Dell with the dedicated memory had a tiny, infinitessimal edge over the HP with the integrated graphics memory, but I had to look at the same scene on the two computers over and over to detect it. So a tiny edge goes to Dell with the dedicated memory, but it's more theoretical than actual.

By all means, you guys can feel free to talk about graphics and various advantages in this thread. I'm presently using an old XP relic, and this pre-purchase investigation is a learning experience for me about graphics, etc. I didn't even know what a Full HD or an IPS screen was before 3 weeks ago.

That's likely a drawing that covers several models with different graphics options.

 

[TheELF]

I get what you're saying, but don't kill the messenger.

This is no different than any GPU.

I was only specifically referring to gaming, but since you brought up video encoding: Quick Sync is faster, but lesser quality when used in common applications compared to pure CPU rendering with many fast cores. QS =/= x26. I think you meant H.26.

1+2
Still doesn't change the fact that APU is marketing talk for acceleration of processing and not for GPU included.

3. QS encodes in x264 or x265, x is the free version of h264 and h265.
Quality depends on bandwidth alone,yes at very low bandwidth core encoding is marginally better quality,but who does calculate the extreme minimum bandwidth for each (scene of each) movie?
At the bitrates that common-folk will encode there is no difference in quality.

 

[GaiaHunter]

APU is just a term for CPU+GPU on the same die while igps where traditionally part of the motherboard chipset.

 

[PS85]

So the Walmart unit might not have a GPU chip on the motherboard after all, the illustration in the manual might be there just for those models in the HP 17-ar line which do use the graphics chip. OK.

Now the next issue is, if I do buy a machine which has an AMD 10 or 12 and R7 graphics, and I want to run the HDMI to a separate monitor that has a 4K ultra display, will I be able to do it? I plan to use the laptop with a monitor, keyboard and mouse when I am using it in the house.

Edit: Just found out one of the two HP units I'm looking at has Radeon R5 graphics, the other HP has R7 graphics, integrated memory. How do R7 and R5 stack up in regards to hooking up a 4K monitor via the HDMI port?

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm not sure about the Trinity or Richland APUs, but the newer Carrizzo and Bristol Ridge APUs support 4K over HDMI, pretty sure. Though, might only be 30Hz support (HDMI1.4).

You'll need to wait for Ryzen Mobile APU-based laptops, for HDMI2.0 / 4K@60Hz outputs.