Embedded GPU graphics

All this talk about i7-8086k vs i7-9700k and there's also the i7-8700k is giving me the itch to upgrade my DAW. Question: is the embedded Intel GPU UHD 630 good enough for multi-display DAW work?
 
Thanks!

I'm counting on that to be the case.  The problem is available motherboards that provide what is wanted...a DVI and a VGA port, with support of up to three monitors. 
 
The only one I could find that is compatible with the i7 8700k is the
AsRock Z370 EXTREME4
 

Jim Roseberry
If you're looking at the new 8-core Coffee Lake CPUs, I'd choose the i9-9900k vs. the i7-9700k.

• 9900k has 8-cores with 16 processing threads (clock speed of 5GHz)
• 9700k has 8-cores with 8 processing threads (clock-speed of 4.9GHz)

It's a matter of price for me (today's Newegg price shown below):
 
CPU - Coffee Lake  Cores/threads  Base/Turbo (1 core) Clock Rate  Price
i9-9900k                    8/16                   3.6/5.0                                        $549
i7-9700k                    8/8                     3.6/4.9                                        $419
i7-8086k                    6/12                   4.0/5.0                                        $478
i7-8700k                    6/12                   3.74.7                                         $369
 
These are all considered 95W devices and include the UHD630 embedded GPU. Price seems to scale (mostly) with Turbo Clock rate. One advantage of the 9xxx processors is they have built-in protection against those recent CPU vulnerabilities.
 
If clock rate is the most important, why focus on the max turbo rate. What not the Base Clock Rate?

Jim will hate me stepping in here, but I've been wrestling with my duel GPU laptop graphics...the Intel GPU is fine and can output duel 4k monitors. I usually have my 4k lg monitor connected to the NVIDA GPU, but in my quest to get the 10bit colour depth to work, I changed over to the displayport output on the Thunderbolt port, which worked fine...so your Intel GPU can output 2 4k monitors easily. I will say though, that this would be at the expense of plugin processing power. The other is Windows is currently working on a fix, to allow full 10 bit color depth to 10bit 4k monitors, which is what uhd actually stands for. And Jim is right about rendering...if you were to do hardcore video rendering, then you would need a stand alone GPU. Personally, if you're going to get a desktop upgrade...Jim knows I'm against desktops, but if you're going to upgrade...NVIDA have plenty of good graphics cards at the 200 bucks Oz that will do the job...but you might want somthing higher for video rendering. And Windows latest update...when they've fixed the bug will apparently fix the uhd problem too. I would steer clear of AMD graphics, Jim might disagree...but from my understanding of the graphics GPU architecture - Open GL inst as well supported as CUDA or AMD vs CUDA. This is more to do with video editing rather than audio.

Sorry Jim...I have been working on graphics and getting my head around what's going on in GPU land for a few weeks now. I'm not trying to tread on your toes, and please correct me if I've got anything wrong.

Ben