• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Skylake / Kaby Lake dual-cores, iGPUs, etc.? (nevermind, please close)


No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
Just wondering about a few things. I have a pair of ASRock DeskMini units, which are mini-PCs that use desktop Skylake (and with a BIOS/UEFI update, supposedly Kaby Lake too) CPUs.

There's no PCI-E expansion slot for a dGPU. So you have to live with the iGPU.

Now, I've got a 1151 ITX board, with dual-channel DDR4-2133 and an i3-6100 in it, and I was actually able to play Skyrim @ 1080P Low on the iGPU. It wasn't too bad.

Now, I'm not going to be playing games on the DeskMini's (I don't think), but my current configuration seems ... laggy? Like, more laggy than it should, with a desktop "big core" CPU powering it. I'm wondering if it's the iGPU.

Right now, I'm using a G3900 in this DeskMini. I also had a 16GB kit of DDR4-2400 SO-DIMMs, which I split up into a single SO-DIMM for each DeskMini. So the iGPUs are running single-channel. I also have them connected up to 40" 4K UHD TVs, via Club3D DP-to-HDMI2.0 adapters, because I can only get 4K30 out of the native HDMI. (So they are running at 4K60 out the DP port through the adapters.)

The other DeskMini is running a G4400. The G3900 seems, way more laggy than the G4400 is, even more than just the CPU Mhz would suggest.

I do have a working theory, that the L3 cache is used by the iGPU as well, so that G4400 has 3MB L3, while the G3900 has only 2MB, and that's affecting the performance of the iGPUs @ 4K60.

I haven't tried taking both SO-DIMMs and putting them into the G3900 rig, to see if the iGPU (scrolling, etc.) performance improves. (I could do that, but it's kind of a hassle.)

I'm just wondering, I think that the G4560 (KBL) has HD610, right, for an iGPU? Not the HD630 of the i3-7100? And therefore, less of an iGPU than the i3-6100 (SKL)'s HD530?

Just wondering, if I would be better off, in terms of seat-of-the-pants browsing performance, by going with a CPU with a better iGPU, rather than just a better CPU.

Granted, I did want to try out KBL, and it seems like the G4560 is at the perfect price-point to try that out, vis-a-via the G3900 and G4400 SKL CPUs, with the added benefit of the improved media-decoding of the KBL CPUs, and HyperThreading on the Pentiums.

TL;DR: Will my browsing experience be just as "laggy" with a faster (with HT) G4560 CPU, because it still has an HD610, which is not faster (?) than the HD510? Or is my problem simply that I'm currently running in single-channel?


No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001

Looks like I should get the G4600 instead, that has HD630 graphics, is 3.6Ghz dual-core with HT, and only like $12 more than the G4560.

Mods, you can lock this thread.

Edit: G4600 is available now on ebay, but for a whopping $100.00. Ouch. Not sure I want to pay that much early-adopter's premium, when I could have gotten a few i3-6100 SKL CPUs for $110 ea. from Newegg a few days ago on sale.
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick


Golden Member
Jul 2, 2013
Are there any gaming benchmarks for Kaby Lake HD630? Probably way too weak to play games like Witcher 3, ROTR, etc but good enough for CSGO, Overwatch, indie games, etc. They really need to improve the driver quality though.


Junior Member
Jan 8, 2017
Hello ,
I also want to know the answer . How much GPU power does super fast browsing requires ?

Intel HD 510/610 not enough ?