Hello, windows 10 will give us a 3D revolution. I hope LFS will be soon on Windows 10 and DX12 or Linux and Vulkan. Its nice that it run yet in Windows XP, but Windows 10 is killing Windows XP now.
I am using in future only mobile devices, because the ATX Items need to much power and in dont want give the power industry a money. Hoping 16nm CPUs with integrated Graphics coming soon....
DX12 or Vulkan make sense only for applications that tax the GPU so heavily that the API overhead and inability to have a fine-grained control over the GPU becomes a problem. I don't believe that LFS is anywhere near that limit. DX12 and Vulkan also require a fairly new GPU because - as far as I gather - both of these APIs make some assupmtions about how a GPU works inside. All this "3D revolution" stuff is just marketing talk. Games won't suddenly get awesome just because their 3D engine is written in Vulkan.
Well, Valve was implementing Vulcan things on existing Intel GPUs (if I recall their presentation correctly), which would make me think that a lot of functionality can be implemented at the driver level, not requiring support at the hardware level (like some OpenGL features require).
I could be wrong, but Vulkan seems to give the greatest "hope" of being backwards compatible. DX12 could be similar, as the last few DX versions haven't seen the hardware changes like some of the DX9 GPU features required.
For a little while I considered explaining why is this statement so ridiculous... then I realized that this sort of argument is consistent with most of your posts so I just chuckled and went on about my day.
No, but claiming that IGC is not a GPU is like the essense of nonsense. By the same logic you should not consider "Civic" a car because Honda calls it "Civic" and not a "Car". It's the function that matters and by definition "Graphics Processing Unit" is a piece of computer hardware specifically designed to generate image and display it on a screen. Intel IGCs do exactly that, hence it is perfectly correct to call them GPUs.
A GPU is generally referring to a discrete add on card, whilst an IGC is always referring to Intel processor based graphics. As indeed do Intel themselves, see above.
Whilst both are strictly speaking GPU's, it clarifies matters to split the Intel processor based IGC's from the discrete card based GPU's.
Here's PC world on the subject..." Champions for discrete graphics usually tout one major benefit: performance. All but the lowest-end video card will have a far more powerful GPU than what you’ll find inside a CPU. What’s more, the card will provide its GPU with a dedicated pool of high-speed memory. An integrated GPU, in contrast, must share both system memory and the data bus. You can usually crank up a game’s visual quality settings with a discrete GPU, and it will still run circles around integrated graphics." http://www.pcworld.com/article/2139341/tested-why-almost-every-pc-could-use-a-video-card-upgrade.html
Why does your Civic claim VTEC rather than 'adjustable valve timing' ?.
Basicly, if you would rather game with an intergrated graphics controller rather than an add on card, good luck and have fun.
Edit: The above is only discussing Intel based IGC systems, NOT AMD's APU system which is different again and will only lead to more confusion discussion .....
But, back on topic re DX12. Win 10 is out 29 July and it's free if you run 7 or 8.1 (NOT 8) and that gives you DX12, Candycrush and Clippy, so I expect most people will get the untold joy of DX12 then
GPU isn't really reffering to a add on card. GPU chips are present since people found out that strong CPU isn't everything you really need but they called it Graphics chips back then. Actual consoles have a GPU from AMD radeon/jaguar but that not means they are add on cards and still they are "GPU" but integrated.
I have to say that intel HD graphics 4600 which you can find on for example desktop version of intel I5 4550 or 4570 and its pretty powerfull GPU. I'have tested it on a friends new Dell PC where he can't put any bigger gpu and i proved him his radeon (cant remember model.. something 6xxx) was a little bit worse compared to integrated GPU found in his CPU. He had 16gb of ram in dual channel which helped to get more juice of integrated GPU (size of ram doesn't matter that much, for integrated GPU's dual channel ram is a big boost).
On a benchmarks HD 4600 from intel integrated GPU is nearly as good as Nvidia GTX 560 TI which was/is acutally a powerfull budget GPU.
And on a PC with that I5 4550 or i5 4570(even without K) with 16GB ram dual channel and HD graphics 4600 we were playing smoothly GTA 5 on medium settings with 35-60 FPS and no lower than 30-35 which is enough for a decent playability.
So if you have a Cpu like this i don't see any reason for buying something similar to GTX 560 ti or GTX 750.
I bought now a A6-6310 Quad-Core APU 20Watt. LFS running only in minimal-configuration. But i dont understand why it is using only 25% CPU, and 25 % GPU? Multicore-Rendering is maybe not supported. I tested also Half Life 1, this run so good like in my old power consumtion system with one CPU. Half Life 2 - i have the test not finished - dont know anymore how many CPU was used, but it run not so good and AA and AF is not supported and should be disabled.
Its is using probably 25% cpu because its quad core and lfs supports only one core (and one core preformance for your CPU is weak, but it does a bit better when some applications uses multi core), im not sure about its gpu how it works but well... but it's pretty poor preformance for a quad core CPU i have to say, it will be okay for web browsing, HD or Blueray movies.
About gpu in this cpu is that it has poor preformance for modern gaming too...
Im not sure if LFS uses well pixel shaders but if not then this gpu won't be any good at gaming.
Also im not sure if this gpu in your cpu supports dual channel but from my actual informations it does not support dual channel memory... Well even this CPU might not use dual channel memory at all...
