[sqeaky]

How can the host have integrated graphics, if integrated graphics don't exist?

Per, Korhojoa, and my personal experience plenty of desktop CPUs simply don't have integrated GPUs. Consumer mainboards simply don't come with them at all. Consider my previous workstation CPU, top of the line a few years ago and no iGPU: https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/desktops/ryzen/50...

Integrated GPUs is a feature of server mainboards so that there is something to display with for troubleshooting, but not on any retail mainboards I am aware of. It is a feature of some consumer grade GPUs designed for either budget or low-power gaming. It simply doesn't exist on all CPUs, consider the AMD 5600, 5600x and 5600g, last gen mid-range CPUs adequate for gaming and the x had a little more clock speed, and the g had an iGPU.

[redox99]

Most AM5 CPUs have integrated graphics. It's also quite common on Intel.

[prmoustache]

> and the g had an iGPU.

So you are contradicting yourself.

[sqeaky]

This is a fundamentally dishonest take. I provided three specific CPUs that varied by just the letter at the end where some had an iGPU and some didn't. I am being honest that some have it but that it isn't ubiquitous.

[prmoustache]

Well when you buy a desktop computer in 2024 their are usually 4 main ways:

- buying a ready made computer from a brand --> always come with an integrated GPU. Some will be even such a small form factor you have to use an external thunderbolt connected GPU if you want to use one.

- you build your computer yourself from parts --> you decide your motherboard and CPU, if VM passthrough is something you want to do, you just buy the parts that fits your use case

- you buy a configurable prebuilt computer from an online or local vendor --> you just have to choose the right option on the configuration tool so that you get a motherboard/cpu that offers integrated GPU.

- you buy second hand and you don't have an igpu: you buy the cheapest gpu available, usually around 10 to 25$ and you have your second GPU that the host can use.

Even when you are using laptop, having 2 GPUs is really not complicated in 2024, especially with thunderbolt external GPU cases/adapters.

Bottom line: you only have one GPU if you actively choose not to have 2.

[michaelmrose]

The average PC is already a trade of that costs the average user around $800 and near 2/3 would need a substantial RAM upgrade a new GPU or both to make gaming through VM passthrough a reality. Most people aren't looking to buy new hardware and learn new tech to game.

It sounds like a useful toy for those whom already enjoy playing with their computer as much as playing with the game.

That said wouldn't limiting the host to integrated graphics (or whatever you get for $25) be a substantial limitation compared to using wine/proton or dual booting?

[prmoustache]

> Most people aren't looking to buy new hardware and learn new tech to game.

Most people don't play game.

Most people that play game that isn't solitary or a web game just buy a playstation, xbox or Switch.

Only a relatively small fraction of people playing AAA games use computer for that. The most hardcore one and the most willing to spend money on a game Rig. And I am pretty sure most of them aren't the least interested in dual boot because they would have a desktop gaming rig and a laptop for everything else anyway. Only a tiny fraction of gamers is probably interested in dual booting. You are part of that tiny group. Fine. The nmbl tool presented in this conference do not prevent dual booting anyway so I am not even sure why people act like they should be offended because grub might be replaced someday by something else with more capabilities.

[michaelmrose]

Only a tiny portion of people are interested in Linux in the first place. Of those it seems like around 25% dual boot.

https://linux-hardware.org/?view=os_dual_boot_win

It doesn't make sense to ex post facto try to justify what people SHOULD do when we can look at what in fact they actually do.

The idea that the only people that play PC games are ONLY play AAA games on their souped up rigs is also a counterfactual. People play games everything from 8 year old laptops to $5000 custom built rigs with RGB everything. You are oversimplifying the universe consists of many and varied irrational individuals not spherical cows.

Dual booting is simple and suitable for nearly 100% of machines running Linux.

Wine/Proton is suitable for nearly 100% of machines running Linux. Steam has reduces this complexity to a few clicks for the majority of titles.

GPU passthrough is unsuitable for 70-80% of configurations and by dint of complexity undesirable for nearly everyone which is why virtually nobody does this.

[sqeaky]

Approximately half of gaming revenue is from PC customers. It wavers up and down depending on exactly what metric you want to use and when the last console refresh was.

You are correct on the complexity cost and how most people, even those with nice gaming computers, just don't want to deal with more complexity than needed. Even mandating a store app that works causes a significant hit to conversion rates. EA couldn't give away Dead Space a previously successful AAA title when bundled with their store.