Question with a dedicated GPU, you can have further small benefits by having the cpu with the integrated video card? would not change a thing?

[Grealish01]

in the presence of a dedicated video card, would having an integrated video card (of the CPU) also bring a small performance improvement? Or the integrated gpu, in the presence of a dedicated gpu, would not even work, in the sense that it would do nothing? there would be a way to also take advantage of the iGPU by making it work to ensure that the performances given by the 2 video cards are added together.

 

[USAFRet]

You use one or the other.
Not both.

It would be like strapping a moped (iGPU) to the side of a car (GPU), hoping to get some boost from the moped motor.

 

[KyaraM]

I heard about some people here plugging a second monitor into iGPU, since it apparently helps when the game crashes to blackscreen and you use the iGPU and taskmanager to close the game instead of restarting. Never tried it, but that's about the most "performance boost" you will get out of that iGPU. It's simply inactive in over 99% of all systems with a dGPU, including my own. Good for error searching, though.

Btw, in notebooks the dGPU is usually only used for heavier loads like games, while the iGPU does all the rest.

 

[geofelt]

What kind of performance are you talking about?
For games, for example, they perform best with the monitor attached to the discrete gpu.
If you have a second monitor(highly suggested) it will not impact gaming if attached to the main gpu.
Experiments show no benefit by attaching the second monitor to the igpu.

A igpu can not be used to augment the gaming performance of the main gpu.

If you are talking about aps, Intel has quick sync for video encoding/decoding that may be of value if that is what you are doing.

 

[renz496]

in the presence of a dedicated video card, would having an integrated video card (of the CPU) also bring a small performance improvement? Or the integrated gpu, in the presence of a dedicated gpu, would not even work, in the sense that it would do nothing? there would be a way to also take advantage of the iGPU by making it work to ensure that the performances given by the 2 video cards are added together.

When dedicated gpu being added to the system the iGPU usually being "turn off". There is no way to make the iGPU and discrete gpu work together in universal way. Even if there is such effort it will be limited by vendor. For example intel iGPU will only work with intel discrete gpu. Same with AMD and nvidia. In the past both AMD and nvidia did try to work on this kind of idea but it is still very limited. For example the iGPU can only work with lowest end gpu only. It cannot even work with upper level low end gpu. And there is also issue that only start coming out when such system in use. Seeing the very minimal performance benefit doing such complicated effort (not to mention user can simply get used gpu to offer better performance without specific issue associated with such setup) Amd and nvidia abandon the idea of "pairing igpu with discrete gpu to get better performance."

 

[Grealish01]

What kind of performance are you talking about?
For games, for example, they perform best with the monitor attached to the discrete gpu.
If you have a second monitor(highly suggested) it will not impact gaming if attached to the main gpu.
Experiments show no benefit by attaching the second monitor to the igpu.

A igpu can not be used to augment the gaming performance of the main gpu.

If you are talking about aps, Intel has quick sync for video encoding/decoding that may be of value if that is what you are doing.

thanks, at first I didn't understand what you meant? If you meant to connect the integrated gpu to the monitor, I didn't understand. Anyway the Intel (aps) thing for video encoding / decoding I didn't know, if you can deepen it you would do me a favor it would be useful

 

[Grealish01]

When dedicated gpu being added to the system the iGPU usually being "turn off". There is no way to make the iGPU and discrete gpu work together in universal way. Even if there is such effort it will be limited by vendor. For example intel iGPU will only work with intel discrete gpu. Same with AMD and nvidia. In the past both AMD and nvidia did try to work on this kind of idea but it is still very limited. For example the iGPU can only work with lowest end gpu only. It cannot even work with upper level low end gpu. And there is also issue that only start coming out when such system in use. Seeing the very minimal performance benefit doing such complicated effort (not to mention user can simply get used gpu to offer better performance without specific issue associated with such setup) Amd and nvidia abandon the idea of "pairing igpu with discrete gpu to get better performance."

what would be the "Intel discrete gpu", however I have a quite particular gpu server, so I asked myself the question, is the gpu a s9300x2, could it be appropriate or does it not change the substance of things?

 

[hotaru.hino]

It has been attempted before by AMD, but like any other multi-GPU system that tries to combine GPUs for performance, it comes with a host of problems. The most pain-free method of rendering is alternating-frames, but this is a problem when one GPU is significantly weaker than the other. Another tries to split the workload up, but this rarely works out as intended. There's also the issue that in order for any multi-GPU system to work effectively, their VRAM contents have to be identical, otherwise they'd have to share data through the PCIe bus which by comparison to VRAM on a video card is very slow. So if you had a 8GB video card, the iGPU has to have 8GB of system memory for this to work.

But yeah, in general, homogeneous multi-GPU systems aren't even that practical. Heterogeneous is just going to make the problems worse.

thanks, at first I didn't understand what you meant? If you meant to connect the integrated gpu to the monitor, I didn't understand. Anyway the Intel (aps) thing for video encoding / decoding I didn't know, if you can deepen it you would do me a favor it would be useful

NVIDIA and AMD have dedicated hardware units for video decoding support. NVIDIA has a dedicated encoder while AMD I believe still does it through shaders. However, the quality of the video at the end of the day isn't the best compared to say x264. But hardware video encoders are great for speed and where quality is limited anyway, like streaming to Twitch.

 

[geofelt]

thanks, at first I didn't understand what you meant? If you meant to connect the integrated gpu to the monitor, I didn't understand. Anyway the Intel (aps) thing for video encoding / decoding I didn't know, if you can deepen it you would do me a favor it would be useful

google "quick sync"
The capability is unique and is not likely to be what you are looking for.

Your use of a s9300x2 indicates that you are using the graphics compute capability, and not the display capability since the s9300x2 has no graphics outputs.

The app you are using should have recommendations as to what your minimum and recommended
hardware requirements are.

Most forum users here are more attuned to graphics cards as they apply to high fps gaming requirements.
That is an entirely different use of a gpu.