Question Integrated graphics 4k at 144Hz

Jun 14, 2023
5
0
10
Are there any Intel or AMD integrated graphics that support 4k at 144Hz?
If there are, what are the cheapest ones I can get away with for standard office workloads and 4k movies, no games?
Intel specs mention output resolutions and refresh rates, but nothing about 4k @ 144Hz (plus, they differ for HDMI and DP).

Since integrated graphics use ports on the motherboard, I'll get one with HDMI 2.1 and DP 1.4 (that's the best available at the moment, as far as i know). If the motherboard does not include 4k@144Hz on its website, will the output be effectively "throttled"?



Thanks...
 
You really have to look at CPU capabilities and motherboard capabilities.

I would lean towards a Ryzen 5600G or 5700G for general purpose compute/graphics. At least until AMD releases Zen4 + RDNA based APUs. There is one so far, but it is rather pricey.

That would be AMD's Z1 processor, which is what you will find in upcoming handhelds but nothing yet as a discrete components.

B550 (and the X570 motherboards presumably) chipsets seem to claim HDMI 2.1 support, so that would probably be the best bet with a 5600G or 5700G.

But be prepared for this to not work. You may be better off with an entry level GPU to guarantee the capability.
 
You really have to look at CPU capabilities and motherboard capabilities.

I would lean towards a Ryzen 5600G or 5700G for general purpose compute/graphics. At least until AMD releases Zen4 + RDNA based APUs. There is one so far, but it is rather pricey.

That would be AMD's Z1 processor, which is what you will find in upcoming handhelds but nothing yet as a discrete components.

B550 (and the X570 motherboards presumably) chipsets seem to claim HDMI 2.1 support, so that would probably be the best bet with a 5600G or 5700G.

But be prepared for this to not work. You may be better off with an entry level GPU to guarantee the capability.
So I guess the situation really does come down to buy and hope for the best?

Is there anybody on here who could confirm that this can be done (with whatever cpu/motherboard)?

Any reason you picked AMD over Intel? I put my current desktop together some 10 years ago and have not really kept up since.

I do actually intend to get a dedicated GPU, but it might have to be Nvidia (for some convoluted compatiblity reasons), and I don't want to deal with their proprietary drivers on Linux.

If the motherboard supports 4k @60hz, that will work out ok.
You need DP or hdmi2.1.
30hz is stuttery, but 60hz works very well for all but fast action graphics.
I think you would have no issue with 4K@60hz.

Do you have a monitor in mind?

I read that 120Hz is better for eye strain, and since I am upgrading the monitor as well, might as well try to use it to its full capabilities.

I am not dead set on any specific brand/model, my only requirement is that it supports 4k at 144Hz (or better). My presumptive pick would be LG UltraGear 27GP95R.
Any reason not to get it?
 
AMD has the better integrated graphics, for the last many generations. (And likely in the near future) At least until Intel launches their chiplet style CPUs on desktop. That will have a separate GPU tile and may compete okay with AMD offerings.

Intel is decent as well in this last generation, but still not really up to same performance level as an AMD APU. AMD APUs are also pretty cheap.

If you are going for an Nvidia card, GT1030 will do the job with display port 1.4, HDMI 2.0 would be limited to 60hz I believe.

Intel A380 is probably the next step up, but I don't know how their Linux drivers do. (I use this card exclusively to drive a 4K TV) Only HDMI 2.0b again, but does have Display Port 2.0.

RX6500XT might be an option as well, but I would rather see the RX6600 since it is fully featured. That should have HDMI 2.1 but only Display Port 1.4. Latest RX7600 from AMD supports both HDMI and DP 2.1.


I have never considered refresh rate to be a big impact on eye strain, if anything that should result in a brighter picture...
 
Waay back when we used crt monitors that needed to be completely refreshed continuously.
As I recall one needed 85hz to avoid eye flicker.
Now with led that no longer applies since the image is persistent and only changes when the image changes.

But, monitors tend to last a very long time.
Consider buying a larger 4k monitor, perhaps in the 40" range.
And, keep your old monitor as a side monitor.
Rtings review will tell you bunches about monitors.
The 27GP95R does not seem to show up as a top pick:
 
Thanks all,
as far as I know, both Intel's and AMD's integrated graphics drivers are fine on Linux.

What really decides which one I get is whether I can get it to run 4k at 144Hz - officially or not.

I am most likely stuck with having to buy an Nvidia dedicated GPU, and using their closed-source drivers on a daily basis is a headache I would like to avoid. I guess I could use the unofficial open-source driver, or buy another dedicated GPU as a last resort, but again - a nice and clean solution would be to use a graphics chip integrated into the processor.

As for monitors, I have not found any scientific literature that evaluates refresh rates and eye strain. Randomly searching the internet, some say 120Hz is noticeably better, others that there is no real difference - guess I have elected to find out for myself. Setting my monitor requirements at 4k and 144Hz while staying inside the budget more or less decides what I can get (I am not located in the US, making the process a bit less streamlined).