Intel demos Tiger Lake mobile chip running Battlefield V at 30 fps

Please don't use AdoredTV as a source, not even for performance benchmarks. Not trustworthy.

Vega 8 in the older APUs (3550H, 1200MHz) already managed about 20-25FPS at that res and settings.

The new version of Vega 8 (1750MHz, faster CPU, faster memory support) in the 4900HS is only going to be significantly faster on such a test.

I'm happy that Intel's iGPU is a good step over what they have now, wait for direct comparisons though.

Completely agreed, anyone who works in this industry knows AdoredTV is absolutely full of ****. He hasn’t got a clue.
 
It doesn't seem much, from an "hardcore" player, but 30 FPS on a small notebook using integrated GPU is a game changer in the industry. I'm impressed.
 
I'd really like Tiger Lake to beat the new Vega 8, so that AMD releases a mobile APU with stronger graphics.
Rumors are it's coming anyway, but decent competition would ensure that.

There's really no reason for graphic cards like the mx250 to exist, APU's can do better and more efficient than that.

Well notebookcheck have now identified tests ran that suggest the Tiger Lake iGPU is between 14 and 18 percent faster than Vega 8 in Timespy.

However it must be pointed out that the Tiger Lake machine was in a 28w config versus the Renoir part's 25w. Also Tiger Lake was apparently using LPDDR4x 4266 MHz memory. This would almost certainly account for a great deal of the difference as the high end Renoirs we are seeing typically use 3200MHz.

All that extra memory bandwidth always really helps integrated graphics, since they share it with the CPU. It is always less likely that anything but expensive configurations would use memory that fast.

Nevertheless it appears Intel have a much faster iGPU on their hands than last generation, which is surely a good thing.
 
Please don't use AdoredTV as a source, not even for performance benchmarks. Not trustworthy.

Vega 8 in the older APUs (3550H, 1200MHz) already managed about 20-25FPS at that res and settings.

The new version of Vega 8 (1750MHz, faster CPU, faster memory support) in the 4900HS is only going to be significantly faster on such a test.

I'm happy that Intel's iGPU is a good step over what they have now, wait for direct comparisons though.
I'll pile on here as well, Jim at AdoredTV rarely uses his own benchmarks because he doesn't get sample products, his analysis is based on other websites and YouTubers benchmarks. Jim is imminently trustworthy, or at least as trustworthy as the leakers who feed him information. If you don't like his analysis and conclusions just say so, but don't attack a man's integrity without cause.
 
I'll pile on here as well, Jim at AdoredTV rarely uses his own benchmarks because he doesn't get sample products, his analysis is based on other websites and YouTubers benchmarks. Jim is imminently trustworthy, or at least as trustworthy as the leakers who feed him information. If you don't like his analysis and conclusions just say so, but don't attack a man's integrity without cause.

Plenty of cause in my opinion to question the validity of anything said by that outlet when used as a source elsewhere.

Well within my rights to cast doubt on the use of such a source here all the same. You're welcome to ignore my opinion, such is your right.
 
The one other benchmark I've been able to find with a Ryzen integrated GPU playing Battlefield V shows similar frame rates, but it was a Vega 6 graphics on low settings. Seems like very few outlets benchmark BF V on laptops. I wonder if that's why Intel chose it, so direct comparisons wouldn't be possible?
 
Intel have a history of dodgy choices for benchmarks, so that wouldn't surprise me in the least. That would fit quite well with the guy presenting, too.
 
Last edited:
Back