I recently wrote about how the demise of low-cost GPUs created a huge problem for PC gaming. This means having to spend an extra $100 to $200 just to buy the cheapest GPU is a serious hurdle for many gamers who simply don’t have one. Just like everyone else. Without new, lower-priced models to replace older ones, these gamers will inevitably be left behind and find themselves lacking in options for modern and even recent PC games. If these gamers are locked out of their PCs and switch to consoles, it could even have a negative impact on the entire PC gaming ecosystem.
A surprisingly common rebuttal to my article that I wasn’t expecting is that CPUs with faster integrated graphics (i.e. AMD’s Ryzen APUs) fill the void left by lower-end cards in both performance and value. The idea was that it could be filled. Obviously, I completely disagree with this idea. The next generation of AMD and Intel graphics are rumored to be much faster than the current ones, but we strongly believe that budget gamers are at a significant disadvantage with integrated graphics over discrete GPUs.
APU has terrible value in terms of graphics performance
While lower-end graphics cards tend to be less amazing when it comes to value (GPUs are only that cheap, after all), APUs are even worse. This may sound strange. Because you’ve probably heard that APUs are actually better when it comes to value for money, and to some extent that’s true. Most Ryzen APUs are priced below $250, with the most expensive being the 8-core 5700G which costs over $300.These chips have great CPU cores and Relatively fast integrated graphics, but what’s the problem? Well, the problem is half the CPU, not half the GPU.
Every time you buy an APU, you’re not just buying integrated graphics, you’re also buying a CPU. Needless to say, the CPU portion of an APU increases the price. Especially since most of the space within the APU is taken up by the CPU cores, memory controllers, and other things needed by the CPU. However, APUs tend to be larger than lower-end graphics chips, making them more expensive to produce and having significantly less silicon dedicated to graphics horsepower. Most of the money you spend on APUs goes to the CPU, not the GPU.
APU is a great buy for those on a budget just once. The whole idea is to start with an APU and get a real graphics card when you can afford it. But if a budget gamer can only buy his APU, then he basically has to buy both, along with a new GPU. and Every upgrade requires more CPU, which is just a waste of money. This system will never be acceptable for more expensive PCs or mid-range desktops, so it cannot be an acceptable replacement for low-cost PC builds either.
Traditional integrated graphics are much slower than the slowest low-end cards
Source: XFX
I understand the argument that APUs can replace low-end graphics cards because they are affordable. Granted, it doesn’t make any sense if you look closely at it, but APUs are a good first step to building a low-cost PC, so the basic idea isn’t completely wrong. But I was really perplexed when I read comments about APUs not only being more affordable, but also trying to replace low-end GPUs in real-world performance, or already doing so. There is no debate about this. Integrated graphics have rarely outperformed discrete graphics.
Currently, the fastest integrated GPU is AMD’s RDNA3-based Radeon 780M, which powers the fastest 5nm Ryzen 7040 APUs, including the Z1 that powers ROG Ally. Meanwhile, AMD’s latest lowest-end card is the $150 RX 6400, which has the same number of GPU cores but uses the older RDNA2 architecture and 6nm node. Still, the RX 6400 is about 40% faster in 3DMark Time Spy. Remember, the 780M is what you get with the top-of-the-line Ryzen 7040 APU, and if it were to come to desktops, I’d expect the top-of-the-line model to cost at least $300.
The 780M uses a better manufacturing process, better architecture, and even has much higher clock speeds, so how can it lose out so much? Well, it’s size. Creating a high-performance processor requires a lot of space. One thing the 780M has absolutely no room for is cache. The 6400 has 16MB of L3 cache, while the 780M doesn’t even have L3 cache and only has 2MB of L2. As we’ve learned over the past three years or so, caching is great for improving gaming GPU performance.
But when you look at the spec sheet, you might be incredulous at the idea that there isn’t enough space. After all, the Ryzen 7040 APU measures 178mm2, while the RX 6400 measures just 107mm2. Now, going back to what I mentioned earlier, the APU also comes with CPU cores. The ultimate problem with APUs is that they are CPUs with integrated graphics, rather than GPUs with integrated CPU cores. Graphics is hampered by low cache, the need to use slower DDR memory instead of GDDR, and very limited size. Graphics performance isn’t the only priority.
The next generation of integrated graphics is no different. Because the graphics aren’t going to be that big (if at all), they don’t use dedicated memory, and there’s no magic that somehow negates these two problems. We won’t see large APUs like those found in the Xbox or Playstation. Because mainstream motherboards require massive sockets that don’t make sense. It also loses out to discrete graphics with comparable specs. There are no fast APUs that can match low-end GPUs, and there never will be.
APUs are not true replacements for low-cost gaming GPUs
As low-end GPUs become obsolete, APUs will naturally have to replace them. But this is clearly not an improvement, just a natural consequence of removing an entire tier of graphics cards from the market. Poor PC gamers were already being treated badly, as low-end GPUs were often worth less than mid-range models. But if they have to buy an APU to get newer, more affordable hardware, that’s just horrible.
Budget PC gamers aren’t going to accept APUs as a real replacement for lower-end cards. They will eventually abandon PC gaming and switch to consoles, which offer more affordable hardware and attractive performance. Do you think it won’t affect you if these gamers leave the community? Latest hardware research from Steam According to , about 10% of users own a GTX 1050, 1050 Ti, and 1650. This is only one of the lowest-end GPUs and accounts for 10% of the largest PC gaming community today. PC gaming can’t afford to lose this many people.