Intel shares iGPU performance data of Intel Core Ultra 7 155H

[Redaktion]

Hot Hardware and Intel had a live broadcast event where the chip manufacturer introduced the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H CPU. According to the data shared, the Xe-LPG iGPU beats the Radeon 780M found inside the AMD Ryzen 7840U. To be specific, the performance difference can go up to 10% in different games.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-shares-iGPU-performance-data-of-Intel-Core-Ultra-7-155H.782988.0.html

[RobertJasiek]

Ich traue dem Frieden ja noch nicht, aber falls die Zahlen repräsentativ für Anwendungen sein sollten, wären Intel-iGPUs plötzlich besser als AMD-iGPUs. Das wäre Intels größter Fortschritt seit der Ära vor ++++++++. Der Nachteil aber bleibt nur 6 statt 8 P-Kerne. Der tatsächliche Verbrauch steht noch in den Sternen. Ohne Effizienz kann man die Geschwindigkeit vergessen. Ist auch die Effizienz vergleichbar oder hat Intel nur den Ofen geheizt?

[Hotz]

Yeah, looks pretty good to be honest.

The Timespy Graphics Score (3.452 points) is at least on par with the dedicated mobile A370m GPU. And that's pretty good for an iGPU.

Although the iGPU should be the same chip-tile, it isn't trivial or certain that they could achieve the same performance. Especially since the A370m had GDDR6 RAM and more power in comparison. I also watched some parts of the video and could see the Intel guys were genuinely happy in what they achieved. Eventually I believe the iGPU will be better than the mobile dGPU because it can access more (shared) RAM.


But as @RobertJasiek said, I also remain cautious for a while until some independent tests come out. Yet, the iGPU definitely looks like a serious competitor to the 780m.

[Neenyah]

For me personally it's almost always a laptop with strong CPU but with only iGPU. Then I use eGPU, as dGPUs in laptops are always nerfed in VRAM size and some get inadequate to do the work even after one year. The 2022 Legion 5 Pro with the 6 GB 3060 is one example; it is basically useless now in 2023 when 6.7 GB is the minimum needed VRAM for many apps (and games at 1440p, not even at 4K). So the next step up is 8 GB dGPU but is that going to be enough in 2024 or 2025? Time will tell.

So iGPU + eGPU for me. That way I simply slide my Core X out, pop a new GPU in and plug it back to my laptop, problem solved. Another benefit is that they share memory together, so let's say they get up to 8 GB shared for iGPU + 16 GB dedicated VRAM with GPU in an eGPU setup and you get effective and usable 24 GB of (V)RAM. Pretty much all games are perfectly playable at 70-120 fps in ultra/maxed details at 1440p native (so no FSR/DLSS) so that's another benefit because to get such experience with a gaming laptop you need to pay a pretty damn high price these days and you will probably still have less VRAM for work and your laptop won't be thin, light, and with good battery. If you want to game on the go - grab a Steam Deck, it will still be significantly cheaper than getting a (gaming) laptop with 12+ GB VRAM dGPU and you will get longer battery life.

Long story short, this is looking great and very promising here for Intel's upcoming iGPU(s?). But it's an "i7" variant here so I wonder how is their "i5" version going to perform; if they get it anywhere near AMD's 680M (but stronger than the 660M) that will be awesome 🤞

[Serhii]

So Intel compared the benchmark of its 65w pseudo notebook processor, with really took over 140w to AMD 15w processor. It really shame to Intel.

[Gautam]

I guess you had your fact-check wrong. Both are of 28W.