What would happen if Intel removed the iGPU?

[purple stain]

So I've been curious about this for a long time just wanted to bounce it off you guys to see what you think or if it would even make a difference.

If Intel were to make an i7 or even an i5 variant, say a 8700k, that doesn't have the iGPU in it wouldn't that make sense? More cores, speed, less heat, more cache? Most people at that level are going to have a dedicated GPU anyway.

Why doesn't Intel do this?

 

[Hellfire13]

Well, you are right in a way. It definitely makes more sense as most people use dedicated cards on that level.
But I think Intel has persisted with it for a more dynamic range of audience. People who dont have high workload like gaming and only into basic movie watching and net surfing. Or scenarios where people dont have the budget to go after a discreet card instantly and still run the pc waiting to upgrade to a high end card eventually. Even in some cases, where the card fails, you can still run the computer.

 

[Dunlop0078]

They have done it many times in the past and probably will again. The Xeon 1231E3 is pretty much an i7 4790 with slightly lower clock speeds, support for ECC memory, and no IGPU. Intel's extreme platform with cpu's such as the i9 7900x have no iGPU. The i7 7740x is bascially an i7 7700k on a diffrent socket with no iGPU.

They could do it easily. In my opinion k sku cpu's don't really need an iGPU, however it is useful for trouble shooting GPU's or any reason you would need to boot into windows without a dedicated gpu.

 

[13thmonkey]

there was a 2500p, just like this. but you can't just put 'more cores' yes you've got the space. but the complexity would be immense.
If you aren't using the iGPU it doesn't create heat.

 

[Lkaos]

Corporate offices...They usually buy these systems...They dont need high spec GPUs, just work and net surfing, and some basic solitare gaming... ;-)

 

[purple stain]

I totally forgot about the marketing, I was not thinking outside the box. If they made a non extreme edition without an iGPU it would disrupt the X series platform. Thanks guys!

 

[King_V]

Wouldn't it be more complex? I mean, ok, I am just assuming a lot of how they make the chips, but aren't the 8700k CPUs just binned 8700s that they then unlock?

Maybe that's easier to do than eliminate the iGPU entirely - I honestly couldn't say with any certainty, though.

 

[mdd1963]

Thought I read the iGPU was only contributing 10 watts or so to heat/power draw anyway. It's the '15-20 watts every 100 more MHz' that is the current stumbling block. Die shrink time!

 

[chemmajorp53]

Well they make pretty much all the chips the same way and which CPU it ends up being depends on how the die is cut and how many cores meet QC. A significant portion of their CPUs (8700, 8400, 8100) will go to companies like Dell/HP/Lenovo who require CPUs with integrated GPUs. I'm sure someone in corporate has worked out that they make more profit only having one process despite a majority of individual system builders not using the iGPU at all. And, at the end of the day, if I could buy an 8700k without the iGPU for $15-20 less, I would still buy the one with the iGPU just because it's nice to know you can at least use the system if your GPU fails.

 

[USAFRet]

If Intel were to make an i7 or even an i5 variant, say a 8700k, that doesn't have the iGPU in it

So basically a Xeon.

 

[jaguarskx]

Generally speaking, all 8th gen Core i5 and i7 CPUs are the exact same CPUs. Depending on how many defects the specific CPU it gets binned as an i5 or i7 CPU, and then it gets binned further into specific models.

If an 8th gen Intel CPU has too many pathways related to Hyper Threading (HT) that are malformed / non-functional, then it would get binned as a Core i5 CPU. If enough pathways are functioning for HT to work properly then it is binned as a Core i7 CPU. In the case where 2 of the 6 core are unstable / non-functional but the pathways for HT is fine, then Intel will likely set them aside to be released as a Core i3 variant. If 2 core are bad and HT is non-functional, then.... I dunno. I am sure in this case Intel will not simply dump the CPUs, instead the would make another SKU and market them as a lower end CPU. Selling "poorly" manufactured CPU at a low price or even a partial loss, is better than dumping them in a landfill which is a total loss.

 

[miftamail.huda]

The price will be cheaper