Intel Xe Graphics Release Date

Intel has repeatedly targeted a 2020 release, and all indications are that it's still on track for that. Coronavirus delays might push things back a bit, but given that Intel is primarily responsible for the manufacture of the GPUs, hopefully late summer or early fall 2020 will still happen. We also know that Intel is prepping for the launch of its 10th Gen Core processors, aka Comet Lake, and the LGA1200 socket with Z490 chipset motherboards. We think those will arrive by June and then, maybe a month or two later, Intel will launch Xe Graphics.

Xe Graphics (Xe LP) is also featured in the upcoming Tiger Lake line of CPUs. We expect those to target laptops and mobile devices, just like the current Ice Lake lineup, but Intel has recently revised its plans during its earnings call and Tiger Lake should arrive later this year. That could be good news for anyone concerned with Intel's 10nm+ yields, as it suggests things have improved—though the Tiger Lake CPU is still very small, so perhaps not.

How Much Will Intel Xe Graphics Cost?

This is perhaps the most difficult question to answer. Intel traditionally doesn't like dealing with low margin parts. It entered, left, and re-entered the SSD storage market multiple times over the past decade due to profitability concerns. We also know that Intel traditionally wants to sell even its lowest performance Core i3 processors for at least $125, with Core i5 usually being priced closer to $200, Core i7 at $300 and up, and Core i9 at $500 or more. We mention those as a point of reference, and note that building graphics cards inherently means far higher base costs compared to CPUs.

With a CPU all you get is a small package and maybe a cooler. A graphics card needs the GPU, VRAM for the GPU, a PCB to hold the GPU and VRAM and other components, all the video ports, power connectors, and a good cooling solution. That means higher costs and lower margins. However, unlike the CPU realm, Intel is completely unproven in the GPU world. Actually, that's not true: Intel has repeatedly proven over the past decade that it makes inferior GPUs and bundles them into its CPUs.

Put simply, there's no way Intel can charge a price premium with consumer Xe Graphics (data center Xe HPC is a different matter). It needs to clearly beat Nvidia on performance as well as pricing—and matching Nvidia on features would help as well. AMD has been coming in second place for ages, and marketing isn't going to make up for a performance deficit.

Realistically, then, an Intel budget Xe Graphics solution needs to be priced around $125-$150 and be able to clearly match or exceed the performance of the GTX 1650 Super and RX 5500 XT. A $200-$250 model needs to at least match if not beat the GTX 1660 Super and hopefully come close to RX 5600 XT performance, while high-end models priced at $300 and up will need to take on Nvidia's RTX GPUs. Depending on when Xe Graphics arrives, it will also have to contend with AMD's RDNA 2 / Big Navi as well as Nvidia's Ampere / RTX 30-series. We fully expect both of those to deliver better performance than the current RTX 20-series, and Intel will need to keep up.

Final Thoughts on Intel Xe Graphics

The bottom line is that Intel has its work cut out for it. It may be the 800 pound gorilla of the CPU world, but even there Intel has faltered over the past several years. AMD's Ryzen has gained ground, closed the gap, and is now ahead of Intel in most metrics. As the graphics underdog, Intel needs to come out with aggressive performance and pricing, and then iterate and improve at a rapid pace. And please don't talk about how Intel sells more GPUs than AMD and Nvidia. Technically, that's true, but only if you count incredibly slow integrated graphics solutions that are at best sufficient for light gaming.

If Intel quadruples the performance of its current Gen9 Graphics, meaning UHD Graphics 630, that will still fall well short of the GTX 1650 Super and RX 5500 XT. Not only does Intel need to deliver better performance at viable prices, but it needs to prove that it can do more in the way of graphics drivers and regular releases. A 'game ready' Intel driver that basically recommends you set everything to minimum quality and run at 720p, and then hope you can still break 30 fps, is a completely different story from drivers and GPUs where Intel needs to keep up with AMD and Nvidia.

Ideally, competition from Intel should help the graphics industry. A viable third player—maybe even a fourth if Huawei starts doing consumer GPUs—means more choice, and hopefully better prices. But that's all contingent on Intel actually delivering the goods. We'll find out in the coming months if Intel can finally join the dedicated GPU market in a meaningful way, or if it needs to head back to the drawing board yet again. Stay tuned.