I've come to the conclusion - integrated graphics are good enough for 99% of the pop.

[VirtualLarry]

Just thinking about it. Built a friend several rigs so far, and all of them have had IGPs in them, and he never complained. Most recent has a 785G, which until SB and LLiano were released, it was the top IGP on the market. But it handles the games that he wants to play, just fine.

Most people don't have gaming rigs. The people in this forum are more the exception, than the rule.

Edit: I don't even really play games anymore. The only reason that I bought GTX460s for my rigs was to run F@H.

 

[Wreckage]

The addition of even a cheap discrete graphics card can free up resources (CPU/Memory).

It's actually a rather inexpensive upgrade that can greatly boost a systems performance.

Now I'm not saying everyone needs a GTX580. But I think most people can benefit from having a separate video card.

 

[MrK6]

You're very correct, VirtualLarry. The release of Intel's "HD Graphics" chips on the core-i series CPU's marked a new era in computing. AIB's and OEM's alike high-fived each other because system building is that much simpler (and I supposed NVIDIA kicked a can into a wall because they lost that much more business). The power of these chips are more than sufficient for all but the most demanding users, and definitely your "average Joe" user. As the tech improves, you'll see integrated GPU's start to eat away at the low-end discrete market as OEM's and their customers will opt for the cheaper, integrated solution.

 

[SirPauly]

I wouldn't agree with 99 percent of the market but probably a solid size of the market place.

I think the market place encompasses many mind-sets and price-points and the key is to have compelling choice for many mind-sets and price-points based on it drives competition, innovation and value. Integration alone isn't the answer to me.

 

[Leyawiin]

I would say more like 80-90%. Of my extended family and friends only three others game regularly and they don't play anything graphically intensive. The vast majority are Facebook/Farmville crowd and don't care. Their $500 Dells do the job for them.

 

[Matt2]

I agree, if they own a Xbox 360.

 

[SolMiester]

I think it would change depending on the age group of the PC owner...A young adult, or teenager is going to want better graphics for gaming period!.....

 

[gevorg]

I think after SB/IB/BD, it will be more like 99.9%. The low-end discrete cards are already obsolete. Haswell/Rockwell will probably take care of midrange cards.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Several games are PC only (or vastly superior / more popular on PC), therefore there is still a decent market for dedicated graphics cards. World of Warcraft and other MMOs, Starcraft series and other RTS games, Diablo series, Half-Life series (available on other platforms, but inferior due to controllers), etc.

So yes, for most, IGPs are more than plenty. For a decent chunk, though, dedicated cards are still a necessity.

 

[wuliheron]

Intel's drivers suck for gaming. It's just not their area of expertise and they don't make discrete graphics cards. For business their integrated graphics make perfect sense, but not for home use.

However, AMD's new fusion chips are crossfire compatible with their discrete graphics cards and they have excellent drivers. That means soon you'll be able to buy a cheap multimedia computer with integrated graphics, and later add a cheap gaming graphics card that can significantly improve performance and extend the useful lifespan of the system. Perfect for home use with computers that might otherwise be given or thrown away.

 

[zagood]

But it handles the games that he wants to play, just fine.

If the games people want to play are not graphically demanding, that's perfect. However, if he has any games that he's forced to play on the lowest settings because of IGP limitations, show him what it looks like on your computer, and then see if it's "just fine."

For a lot of people it's not worth the money, and that's their decision. For others, they don't play the games that need it. That's great. I just worry for the people that don't know any better and haven't been introduced to what's actually available.

 

[AtenRa]

I think after SB/IB/BD, it will be more like 99.9%. The low-end discrete cards are already obsolete. Haswell/Rockwell will probably take care of midrange cards.

I dont thing so,

New low end AMD Caicos with 160 Shaders (Double the HD5450)

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-Turks-OEMs-Caicos-Radeon-HD-6000,12146.html

Low end discrete Graphics cards will co-exist with APUs

 

[BD231]

Just thinking about it. Built a friend several rigs so far, and all of them have had IGPs in them, and he never complained. Most recent has a 785G, which until SB and LLiano were released, it was the top IGP on the market. But it handles the games that he wants to play, just fine.

Most people don't have gaming rigs. The people in this forum are more the exception, than the rule.

Edit: I don't even really play games anymore. The only reason that I bought GTX460s for my rigs was to run F@H.

The people who have integrated graphics use an xbox or play station for gaming anyway so who cares?

If you were to do a side by side comparison someone who didn't know a thing about computers would spot the difference between the two immediately.

 

[Arkadrel]

Llano will be ~5570 grafic level or higher..

Which should be enough for World of Warcraft/starcraft 2/diablo III ect... in like 1280x1024 res.

The Llano will be able to hybrid crossfire with another card.. which should be great value.
I think alot of OEMs are gonna go with Llano + 6570's in hybrid crossfire, which might endup somewhat slower than a 5750, but still....

The price is whats gonna sell it (Llano+6570), because it ll be cheaper than buying a Sandy bridge + 5750.

I dont really see the point of a discrete card thats under the performance levels of the 5570 atm... unless its for older systems with IGPs that are slower than the Llano's.

 

[Insomniator]

IPGs are fine for almost everyone because 99% of people just go on facebook/email/word. A discrete graphics card in this case is not worth it even if it would free up resources. Any dual core machine with enough memory is plenty. Quad cores are complete overkill for most people.

If you want to play basic games then buy a $50 discrete card. This whole idea of igp's that equal super low end cards like a 5570 is dumb imo. Its completely wasted on most people and $50 bucks will always buy a better card for the lightest gamers.

 

[Arkadrel]

IPGs are fine for almost everyone because 99% of people just go on facebook/email/word. A discrete graphics card in this case is not worth it even if it would free up resources. Any dual core machine with enough memory is plenty. Quad cores are complete overkill for most people.

If you want to play basic games then buy a $50 discrete card. This whole idea of igp's that equal super low end cards like a 5570 is dumb imo. Its completely wasted on most people and $50 bucks will always buy a better card for the lightest gamers.

A part of the reason of putting the IGP onboard for AMD was to add alot of GPGPU funktions to the CPU, and removeing a bottleneck (the interconnection between the cpu and the gpu).

Those tiny APUs have alot of gpgpu potential, which means Photoshop/Adobe Flash/encodeing videos/HTML5 thingy ect gpu hardware accellerated.

Thats whats gonna sell them... the GPGPU computeing funktions, that comes with it. I believe thats the idea behinde them, they want GPGPU in everything where it makes sense to utilise it.

IF by haveing a IGP in the same chip as the cpu, they can avoid a bottleneck, save on prices by only useing 1 chip vs 2, and also make it more energy efficent... why not? Also they dont *waste* the GPU... the gpgpu part is used for cpu heavy tasks (once software starts getting optimised for it (gpgpu stuff)).

 

[apoppin]

Just thinking about it. Built a friend several rigs so far, and all of them have had IGPs in them, and he never complained. Most recent has a 785G, which until SB and LLiano were released, it was the top IGP on the market. But it handles the games that he wants to play, just fine.

Most people don't have gaming rigs. The people in this forum are more the exception, than the rule.

Edit: I don't even really play games anymore. The only reason that I bought GTX460s for my rigs was to run F@H.

i'm sorry but your "several PCs" and "a friend" are not a large enough sample to make your sweeping broad generalization:
I've come to the conclusion - integrated graphics are good enough for 99% of the pop.

How many PCs have you built for PC gamers? i am guessing none.

Intel's SB DX10 capabilities are a joke for gamers. All it has done is raised the entry level bar for discreet graphics. Nvidia and AMD will do fine.

 

[Wreckage]

One could easily say that smart phones & tablets are good enough for 99% of the pop.

 

[Skurge]

i'm sorry but your "several PCs" and "a friend" are not a large enough sample to make your sweeping broad generalization:
I've come to the conclusion - integrated graphics are good enough for 99% of the pop.

Whoa, I like what you did there.

 

[SickBeast]

Intel's SB DX10 capabilities are a joke for gamers. All it has done is raised the entry level bar for discreet graphics. Nvidia and AMD will do fine.

NV is most certainly worried about what Intel and AMD can do in terms of integrated graphics. The low end of the market makes up the bulk of NV's profits, so if a lot of people just use integrated graphics, they stand to lose a ton of money.

I sometimes wonder if AMD delayed Fusion on purpose to avoid cannibalizing their GPU business. I find it strange that Intel was able to bring out CPUs with integrated GPUs faster than AMD did.

The thing is, these "fusion" CPUs are only going to become more and more powerful to the point that they will easily compete with midrange GPUs. It's not going to take very long either. I have a feeling that AMD's upcoming "bulldozer" CPU with an integrated GPU is going to be good enough for most people aside from hardcore gamers, which is going to be Nvidia's last bastion unless their CPU plans work out for them (which looks doubtful TBH).

 

[Wreckage]

The thing is, these "fusion" CPUs are only going to become more and more powerful to the point that they will easily compete with midrange GPUs.

Because mid-range GPUs won't ever become more powerful.

Fusion is just an incremental upgrade from last gen integrated graphics. Nothing more. It won't take away discrete marketshare anymore than integrated graphics did in the past.

 

[notty22]

NV is most certainly worried about what Intel and AMD can do in terms of integrated graphics. The low end of the market makes up the bulk of NV's profits, so if a lot of people just use integrated graphics, they stand to lose a ton of money.

I sometimes wonder if AMD delayed Fusion on purpose to avoid cannibalizing their GPU business. I find it strange that Intel was able to bring out CPUs with integrated GPUs faster than AMD did.

The thing is, these "fusion" CPUs are only going to become more and more powerful to the point that they will easily compete with midrange GPUs. It's not going to take very long either. I have a feeling that AMD's upcoming "bulldozer" CPU with an integrated GPU is going to be good enough for most people aside from hardcore gamers, which is going to be Nvidia's last bastion unless their CPU plans work out for them (which looks doubtful TBH).

The low end is no longer ' the bulk' of their profit. This breakdown of Nvidia is a couple months old. The mobile computing chips sector (Tegra) is going to be growing fast.
https://www.trefis.com/company?hm=NVDA.trefis#/NVDA/n-0002?from=sankey .

 

[apoppin]

NV is most certainly worried about what Intel and AMD can do in terms of integrated graphics. The low end of the market makes up the bulk of NV's profits, so if a lot of people just use integrated graphics, they stand to lose a ton of money.

I sometimes wonder if AMD delayed Fusion on purpose to avoid cannibalizing their GPU business. I find it strange that Intel was able to bring out CPUs with integrated GPUs faster than AMD did.

The thing is, these "fusion" CPUs are only going to become more and more powerful to the point that they will easily compete with midrange GPUs. It's not going to take very long either. I have a feeling that AMD's upcoming "bulldozer" CPU with an integrated GPU is going to be good enough for most people aside from hardcore gamers, which is going to be Nvidia's last bastion unless their CPU plans work out for them (which looks doubtful TBH).

Now let me finish your story (in Bold) because you didn't go far enough:

The thing is, these "fusion" CPUs are only going to become more and more powerful to the point that they will easily compete with midrange GPUs so that midrange GPUs will become even more powerful, raising the graphics bar for the entire industry and forcing better graphics on the inhabitants of this biosphere.

win win ... at least that is the master plan

 

[wahdangun]

I dont thing so,

New low end AMD Caicos with 160 Shaders (Double the HD5450)

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-Turks-OEMs-Caicos-Radeon-HD-6000,12146.html

Low end discrete Graphics cards will co-exist with APUs

no because the apu in llano will have 400 sp in it so I'm not sure low end card will be exist on amd platform

 

[brybir]

Because mid-range GPUs won't ever become more powerful.

Fusion is just an incremental upgrade from last gen integrated graphics. Nothing more. It won't take away discrete marketshare anymore than integrated graphics did in the past.

The problem is that the games that most people play are not getting more demanding given the vast majority of games are console ports running graphics hardware from 3 generations ago.

As IGP's get better (and reading Anands article the other day, we are going to see some significant incremental increases in IGPs that we have not seen before) and games stagnate in graphical demands, we will see IGPs fulfilling the needs of more and more people. As you change either of these factors, the number on either side will change over time, and that is hard to predict.