Budget gaming- wich iGPU is better for Fallout 4 ? Ryzen 5500U (vega 7) or Intel i5-1135G7 (Iris Xe)

[poblivion]

Hi, I am planning to buy some cheap laptop with an integrated graphics card. I'm deciding between processors Ryzen 5500U or Intel i5-1135G7.

I watched some tests on Youtube but couldn't find a definite answer. From the tests, the Ryzen 5 5500U seems to be a better choice for gaming.

But not for all games, some games run better on Intel. Games with an open world and a lot of plants (basically similar to Fallout 4) seem to run better on the Intel iGPU.

 

I'd love to hear your opinion or if anyone has personal experience playing Fallout 4 on these iGPUs.

 

Thanks

[Pamatronic]

Sorry to say this, but neither of these two will do you any favors if you plan on playing anything which isnt a text based game...
At least not if the laptop they're build into doesn't have a dedicated graphics chip.

 

When I build my new desktop pc last month (uses a intel i9-12900k) i tried running skyrim with the integrated graphics for shit and giggles, and even that 500 buck cpu barely managed to pull 30 fps on Vanilla LE with high settings.

maybe I misunderstand the question and you so actually have e dedicated GPU, in which case it doesnt really matter which of these two cpus you use (afaik Ryzen seems to have a slight edge over intel at the moment when  it comes to gaming related bang-for-buck ratio, but its marginal at best).

 

But without that, an integrated graphics chip on a laptop cpu is completely useless for gaming.

 

[poblivion]

17 hours ago, Pamatronic said:

Sorry to say this, but neither of these two will do you any favors if you plan on playing anything which isnt a text based game...
At least not if the laptop they're build into doesn't have a dedicated graphics chip.

 

When I build my new desktop pc last month (uses a intel i9-12900k) i tried running skyrim with the integrated graphics for shit and giggles, and even that 500 buck cpu barely managed to pull 30 fps on Vanilla LE with high settings.

maybe I misunderstand the question and you so actually have e dedicated GPU, in which case it doesnt really matter which of these two cpus you use (afaik Ryzen seems to have a slight edge over intel at the moment when  it comes to gaming related bang-for-buck ratio, but its marginal at best).

 

But without that, an integrated graphics chip on a laptop cpu is completely useless for gaming.

 

 

On the contrary, I think integrated graphics cards have made significant progress in performance recently. Of course, there is no question about ENB, but playing in Full HD with medium details should not be a problem with FPS somewhere around 45 - 50 approximately.  I'd love to hear specific experiences from anyone playing Fallout 4 using one of these iGPUs. For example, I'm currently playing on an iGPU Vega 11 (CPU AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE) and it's not too bad.

 

[Gameplayer]

Pretty sure it won't be half details in 1080p it would make the whole point of 1080p 8 gig vram cards mostly pointless.

 

You may have to look around about integrated graphics gaming on modern CPU processors.

Pretty sure people are still thinking games such as StarCraft, diablo 1 n 2, and well stuff back in around early 2000's.

 

As i do keep up with tech pretty sure I listened to tech deals host talk about integrated graphics on the i9 12900k being able to host 4 way lane parties playing those titles I just mentioned above.  There were a whole slew of good multiplayer games in around 2000-2007 that would run on potatoes back then even.

 

Fallout 4, released in 2014 although it needed fairly minimum hardware requirements listed on store page well honestly that was really generous specs and not truthful.

 

Fo4 kicked the crap out of people's computers that had gtx 1080s in 1080p, meanwhile suggested video card was gtx 780 sure that 780 was great card but at time of Fo4 release the 900 series was available and the 1000 series came out in 2015.

 

Another issue with Bethesda games is that people underestimate the need for high end processor and enough RAM.  RAM suggested for Fo4 is a measly 8 gigs of RAM, meanwhile the games RAM usage actually scales really well and with a diskcache enabler mod even better scaling.  I have had Fo4 use actively ~16 gigs of RAM which is something that a lot of people probably don't understand.  See most think we'll I have a total of 16 gigs of RAM, so it's all good, no it is not because that 16 gigs has to hold every active process including all stuff not related to playing Fo4.

 

A 16 gig system can allot 8 gigs of RAM to Fo4.  Windows, Steam are going to use about 6 gigs, you have 2 left in overhead.  Well if you turn on 1 YouTube video stutter City because the game had to give up RAM, why well there always has to be left over free an clear RAM for PC operations in case of critical need.

 

A 32 gig RAM system will allot 16 gigs of RAM actively in use by game, yes active is different than cached RAM.  Active meaning in use right this hot second, cached is information that belongs to game that might be needed and since it is cached it is quickly accessed.  So RAM increases the performance of FPS usually it is the 1% and 0.1% lows which most gamers see and call "stutter" that stutter is the result of not having enough system RAM or video memory or both.

 

At 96 gigs of RAM using diskcache Enabler in 4k.

I have seen Skyrim actively use between 20-24 gigs of RAM and cache 10-14 gigs of RAM.  With fully modded game, including ENB and usage of processor heavy SMP settings well without disk cache enabler the RAM usage takes a dive and thus the fps goes down severely.  Talking about a 100 fps in 4k dip down to 40 FPS and maybe get 60 fps outdoors.  So how well the computer stores massive amounts of information into memory directly effects ALL fps, since I am modding I will and should expect to see scenarios that are outside the normal.

 

So why am I talking so much about RAM?  Well because the typical gamer gets completely brainwashed by tech media to think that in 2024 16 gigs of RAM is all you need.  Hell I can do a search right now and find "knowing" tech masters proclaiming the non-sense that 8 is all u need 

 

More coming

 

[poblivion]

RAM depends, currently I can't imagine less than 16GB RAM, but ideally 32GB RAM, of course in dual channel. Especially if I'm going to use the iGPU for gaming.

Also, a fast NVME drive is essential.

 

Here is one of the iGPU tests

 

[Gameplayer]

Well it is hard to determine if those numbers are accurate or even realistic.  Searching for integrated graphics tests but of a pain, not even sure about if it's not done with say some sort of dGPU in some cases.

 

I think you would be better off asking in laptop forum about what to get.

[Gameplayer]

What I am finding from Internet search is that over on Nexus there are people that have tried it and even make low end mods to reduce the textures down to mind craft levels.

 

Overall on Reddit most I tegrated graphics gamers are playing a lot of indie games but some titles I recognize like world of Warcraft 3, stardew valley, and well a lot of old games.  Here an there I see some big claims like dying light 2 or metal gear solid.

 

S lot of these guys are forcing the resolution I to 800 x 600 that is about 2005 era HD tv resolution too.  

 

I suppose there is likely a market for it, but over all you would be on your own trying to mod the game the whole other direction most enhance the graphics beyond base game.

[poblivion]

Full HD is the lowest resolution that is acceptable for gaming. 

 

As I wrote above I'm currently playing on an iGPU Vega 11 (CPU AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE) with 32GB DDR4 RAM. I have the resolution set to 1920x1080 and medium details (some functions disabled). Average FPS around 38. I would like to reach 60 FPS so I am looking for more powerful hardware, Ryzen 5 2400GE is a bit outdated.

 

I use several mods to modify the graphics as well as a modified texture pack. Used mods: Optimax All-In-One, The Best Color Correction, Intensity - In - Game Graphical Customization Tool, Clarity - A Visual Overhaul, FogOut, Fallout 4 FPS and Performance Fix, Stuttering and Memory patch ENBoost, Desperados.

 

I am attaching some screenshots from my game.

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

Spoiler

 

Edited February 6, 2024 by poblivion

[katrina.balanchuk]

On 2/6/2024 at 6:54 AM, Gameplayer said:

Pretty sure it won't be half details in 1080p it would make the whole point of 1080p 8 gig vram cards mostly pointless.

 

You may have to look around about integrated graphics gaming on modern CPU processors.

Pretty sure people are still thinking games such as StarCraft, diablo 1 n 2, and well stuff back in around early 2000's.

 

As i do keep up with tech pretty sure I listened to tech deals host talk about integrated graphics on the i9 12900k being able to host 4 way lane parties playing those titles I just mentioned above.  There were a whole slew of good multiplayer games in around 2000-2007 that would run on potatoes back then even.

 

Fallout 4, released in 2014 although it needed fairly minimum hardware requirements listed on store page well honestly that was really generous specs and not truthful.

 

Fo4 kicked the crap out of people's computers that had gtx 1080s in 1080p, meanwhile suggested video card was gtx 780 sure that 780 was great card but at time of Fo4 release the 900 series was available and the 1000 series came out in 2015.

 

Another issue with Bethesda games is that people underestimate the need for high end processor and enough RAM.  RAM suggested for Fo4 is a measly 8 gigs of RAM, meanwhile the games RAM usage actually scales really well and with a diskcache enabler mod even better scaling.  I have had Fo4 use actively ~16 gigs of RAM which is something that a lot of people probably don't understand.  See most think we'll I have a total of 16 gigs of RAM, so it's all good, no it is not because that 16 gigs has to hold every active process including all stuff not related to playing Fo4.

 

A 16 gig system can allot 8 gigs of RAM to Fo4.  Windows, Steam are going to use about 6 gigs, you have 2 left in overhead.  Well if you turn on 1 YouTube video stutter City because the game had to give up RAM, why well there always has to be left over free an clear RAM for PC operations in case of critical need.

 

A 32 gig RAM system will allot 16 gigs of RAM actively in use by game, yes active is different than cached RAM.  Active meaning in use right this hot second, cached is information that belongs to game that might be needed and since it is cached it is quickly accessed.  So RAM increases the performance of FPS usually it is the 1% and 0.1% lows which most gamers see and call "stutter" that stutter is the result of not having enough system RAM or video memory or both.

 

At 96 gigs of RAM using diskcache Enabler in 4k.

I have seen Skyrim actively use between 20-24 gigs of RAM and cache 10-14 gigs of RAM.  With fully modded game, including ENB and usage of processor heavy SMP settings well without disk cache enabler the RAM usage takes a dive and thus the fps goes down severely.  Talking about a 100 fps in 4k dip down to 40 FPS and maybe get 60 fps outdoors.  So how well the computer stores massive amounts of information into memory directly effects ALL fps, since I am modding I will and should expect to see scenarios that are outside the normal.

 

So why am I talking so much about RAM?  Well because the typical gamer gets completely brainwashed by tech media to think that in 2024 16 gigs of RAM is all you need.  Hell I can do a search right now and find "knowing" tech masters proclaiming the non-sense that 8 is all u need 

 

More coming

 

 

(Sorry for the thread hijack) 😺

 

Great write up.

For me as a lay person I had my nephew built me a computer 15 months ago.

These are the specs:

i9 10900kf (but with recent update to XTU,  I cannot use the gentle overclock "optmize " tab anymore, it fails and tells me to do by hand which of coruse I dont know how to do and I think I can feel a slight difference to a couple weeks ago when my overclock still worked)

64GB RAM , but its only DDR4 Ram. Should I upgrade to DDR5?

RTX 4070 am happy with this card.

 

The above combination runs at 4k in from 50-100 fps in fallout 4 with a couple hundred mods but I feel I should have gotten a better chip from the beginning.

This is the first computer I ever owned that was not second or even third hand used and is kinda current.

 

 

My old computer was i7 9700 with 16GB RAM and just at idle it used up a third of my memory and I could see it was an issue ( Win 11 plus anti virus plus steam log on took most of that memory)

My old graphcis card was a RTX 760ti and I could not discern a difference playing FO4 (on low settings of course) when I disabled the card and ran on internal graphics.

The chip was much newer than the card though.

When I look at my old FO4 screenshots to now its a world of difference especially since I am running Luxors HD pack.

Edited February 7, 2024 by katrina.balanchuk

[Gameplayer]

53 minutes ago, katrina.balanchuk said:

 

(Sorry for the thread hijack) 😺

 

Great write up.

For me as a lay person I had my nephew built me a computer 15 months ago.

These are the specs:

i9 10900kf (but with recent update to XTU,  I cannot use the gentle overclock "optmize " tab anymore, it fails and tells me to do by hand which of coruse I dont know how to do and I think I can feel a slight difference to a couple weeks ago when my overclock still worked)

64GB RAM , but its only DDR4 Ram. Should I upgrade to DDR5?

RTX 4070 am happy with this card.

 

The above combination runs at 4k in from 50-100 fps in fallout 4 with a couple hundred mods but I feel I should have gotten a better chip from the beginning.

This is the first computer I ever owned that was not second or even third hand used and is kinda current.

 

 

My old computer was i7 9700 with 16GB RAM and just at idle it used up a third of my memory and I could see it was an issue ( Win 11 plus anti virus plus steam log on took most of that memory)

My old graphcis card was a RTX 760ti and I could not discern a difference playing FO4 (on low settings of course) when I disabled the card and ran on internal graphics.

The chip was much newer than the card though.

When I look at my old FO4 screenshots to now its a world of difference especially since I am running Luxors HD pack.

 

Upgrading it further will be expensive and by end of 2024 or start of 2025 the next platform from AMD an Intel should be out.

 

So an upgrade path currently from 10900k,

 

I think honestly if you have the upgrade bug the thing to do is just wait till the new motherboard sockets are out.

 

So Intel would be like 15th Gen 

AMD I think is 9000  series CPU

 

Those CPUs start on brand new motherboard platforms about end of this year or start of next year.

 

So if you buy now the stinker is that before long you could have used your money to buy into the next zoomy platform with the new CPU chips.

An those new boards every 12-20 months will have the next generational CPU upgrade.

Where getting into a current AM5 or LGA 1700 socket board is at end of service for upgrades.

 

But idk maybe you just want the best at the moment.

Uh

14900k 

360 aio cooler

ASRock z790 Dark Nova

2x32 ddr5 RAM kit

 

Look 6400 mt on RAM or heck it's dark Nova board you can safely do 7200 MT speed on RAM.

 

That will be insane honestly but in a 8 months new mobo is out and might get 3 generations of CPU use out of the boards coming.

[Gameplayer]

22 hours ago, poblivion said:

Full HD is the lowest resolution that is acceptable for gaming. 

 

As I wrote above I'm currently playing on an iGPU Vega 11 (CPU AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE) with 32GB DDR4 RAM. I have the resolution set to 1920x1080 and medium details (some functions disabled). Average FPS around 38. I would like to reach 60 FPS so I am looking for more powerful hardware, Ryzen 5 2400GE is a bit outdated.

 

I use several mods to modify the graphics as well as a modified texture pack. Used mods: Optimax All-In-One, The Best Color Correction, Intensity - In - Game Graphical Customization Tool, Clarity - A Visual Overhaul, FogOut, Fallout 4 FPS and Performance Fix, Stuttering and Memory patch ENBoost, Desperados.

 

I am attaching some screenshots from my game.

 

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

Honestly that is cool thanks for sharing these.

 

I have no idea about the laptops, think by the time you select a powerful enough CPU probably will also have at least some sort of graphics card at least I imagine anyway.

[poblivion]

23 hours ago, Gameplayer said:

 

Honestly that is cool thanks for sharing these.

 

I have no idea about the laptops, think by the time you select a powerful enough CPU probably will also have at least some sort of graphics card at least I imagine anyway.

 

Now I bought a laptop with an i5-1135G7 processor, I am waiting for it to arrive. Then I'll let you know how Fallout 4 runs on the Iris XE iGPU. Hopefully this information will be helpful to others who would like to try it as well.

[katrina.balanchuk]

When I made my post the real point for the OP I tried to make got lost in all my other chatter 😺

 

My old rig had  a i7 9700.

When I turned my ( ancient) graphics card off the game ran on the internal graphics only just as good ( or bad in looks) as on my 760ti  GPU.

So I thought thats just how the game looks.

 

But it was eminently playable and did not look like Warcraft.

[poblivion]

So to sum it up. I had the opportunity to test laptops with both mentioned processors. In my testing, both processors seemed to be of similar performance (I mean integrated graphics).

 

AMD Vega 7 graphics has smaller FPS drops, graphics performance is smoother, but in Fallout 4 it showed slightly lower performance (1-2 FPS).

Intel IRIS Xe graphics have slightly higher performance (around 1-2 FPS compared to AMD Vega 7), but more significant FPS drops.

 

For less demanding players, both integrated graphics cards are sufficient for playing at low to medium details at Full HD resolution, an average of around 35-40 FPS can be achieved.

 

So my conclusion is that my expectation was not met. The performance gain over my current GPU is negligible. So I'll stick with my old PC.

 

PS: The minimum ram size is 16 GB, optimally 32 GB, the lower the timing (CL), the better.

 

MY SETTINGS:

Edited March 3, 2024 by poblivion

[clvin0828]

Use Intel gpu play PC game is looking for trouble,

Play Fallout 4 best is NV, than AMD,

My mod have 500+, I have 32GB DDR4 RAM, using 11gb RAM in game,

My gpu is AMD 6800XT 16GB , have ENB, 2K, All ultra, using gpu ram 9～13gb in game,

No ENB 1080p maybe Just using 6gb gpu ram is enough

Final, It is recommended to use SSD