Hi everybody! I’m not sure if I can use this forum for advice, but let me know if that forum is not for that.
I would like to upgrade my laptop to a tiny desktop. I have two options: i5-9500T with Intel® UHD Graphics 630 or i5-8259U with Iris® Plus Graphics 655. The heaviest task that I’ll perform sometimes is video editing, mostly in 1080p.
Unfortunately I’m not well understanding what’s going at Intel because lack of information or my understanding.
I read that Iris is the top or integrated GPU. But in the same time, i5-8259U has just 4 cores, and it’s 28w. From other side, i5-9500T consumes more power (is that bad for a desktop?!) and has 6 cores, but it comes with UHD Graphics 630.
I found a comparison in Youtube between Iris and UHD Graphics in a game. And Iris overperformed UHD. And Intel says that Iris perform fast encoding in H265. That means that non Iris doesn’t do it so well?
So, I’m confused. If Iris is better, why Intel doesn’t have a desktop grade CPU with Iris, but only with UHD Graphics line? Come back to my initial question: i5-9500T vs i5-8259U for occasional video editing?
Sorry for long question, and thank you for any input, explanation or Intel link/whitepapers for reading.
Doc, thanks for the link. I double checked it already many times, and this is why I asked help, because this numbers that confused me.
The i5-8259U is more expensive, I believe because it is more energy efficient (but somebody mentioned something about throttling problems).
In the same time, i5-9500T has 6 cores, but cheaper. 6 cores supposed to be better, thinking about desktop I shouldn’t be worrying about temperature and power. But why then i5-9500T doesn’t come with Iris graphics, that is the best integrated GPU, as Intel said. What makes me more confused, is that Iris has 300 MHz but UHD 630 Graphics – 350 MHz. Does it mean that frequency not so important?
The 8259U is almost two years old. Things change, and new graphics are implemented in the 9500t.
The 9500T has more cache, faster bus speed, more cores, faster graphics, faster memory, is newer, AND.... drum roll.... It is cheaper!
Now, regarding these two processors, I am not sure what your intent is. The 8259U is soldered to its motherboard, the 9500T is not, meaning that youmay be able to upgrade to another processor in the future. I say "may" - there are dependencies.
Those two graphics have the same DirectX, OpenGL, OpenCl, and Vulkan APIs:
Regarding "Somebody mentioned...", I know of no such issues. Have that "somebody" produce documentation regarding such a concern.
I know what my choice would be.
Doc, I really appreciate your input and agree that i5-9500T is newer processor and because it mostly designed for a desktop, probably has a little more performance.
But not the graphics. And we’re talking about graphics here.
Both UHD Graphics 630 (GT2) and Iris® Plus Graphics 655 (GT3e) built on 9th generation graphics architecture. GT2 has 24 execution units but GT3e has 48 + 64 MB of eDRAM cache.
So my question still the same: why does Intel use more advanced graphic in “U” ultra-lower power chips, and doesn’t on Desktop versions?
May be somebody from Intel can help…
Thank you for posting on the Intel® communities.
I suggest checking different benchmarks available online from different parties to verify what would be the best choice for your intended usage. Regarding your question why Intel hasn't released a Desktop processor with Iris Plus graphics, keep in mind that Intel designs and markets products for different user markets and their respective workloads. I would take your feedback to the right teams for any future consideration.
Intel Customer Support Technician
A Contingent Worker at Intel
The INTEL IRIS 655 puts the 630 to shame! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Graphics_Technology
Then again, you must take into account the MAX CLOCK SPEED...
I have an i7 with 630 @ 1.3Ghz and want to move to a more compact unit (INTEL NUC 8 gen) that has a IRIS 655 @ 1.05Ghz!
I wonder what that difference in clock can represent...