Intel Rolls Out Their New CPUs With Radeon Vega M Graphics

[IreMinMon]

100W TDP for a CPU targeted at "notebooks, mini PCs, and 2-in-1s"?
You need some serious cooling solution to be able to handle that in that formfactor, but if the iMac Pro can it's probably not impossible just very expensive.

So we knew most of what they're saying before, now we just got to know the TDPs I think.
Well since speculation is most of what we do here, I designed this table specifically for speculation


While AMD has been wasting time with their consoles, nvidia has been making huge profits with overpriced trend of gaming laptops. I think it's the fastest growing hardware market in gaming. Gaming laptops are horribly unbalanced though. We'd been using the same 45W quad cores so far in combination with both 150W and 60W GPUs. Most reasonably priced GPUs (especially in trendy thin and light laptops) don't need this kind of performance (and power drain).

My guess is these APUs will be performance equivalents 1050Ti+7700HQ and 1060+7700HQ, but with lower TDPs (60W as opposed to 100W and 100W as opposed to 125W).
These will be gaming oriented machines, with 60W APU dedicating about 15W to the CPU and 45W to the GPU and 20-25W to the CPU and 75-80W to the GPU on the 100W APU.
Manufacturers will be allowed to change the clock speeds/TDP on these APUs to suit their cooling solutions. At best we can hope for laptop 1060-tier performance.

[vortex]

Is Meltdown bug fixed is those processors?

It takes 12-16+ months to redo hardware, so no.

[marty1885]

Very curious. Can we run ROCm on this prosessor?

[dungeon]

My guess is these APUs will be performance equivalents 1050Ti+7700HQ and 1060+7700HQ, but with lower TDPs (60W as opposed to 100W and 100W as opposed to 125W).
These will be gaming oriented machines, with 60W APU dedicating about 15W to the CPU and 45W to the GPU and 20-25W to the CPU and 75-80W to the GPU on the 100W APU.
Manufacturers will be allowed to change the clock speeds/TDP on these APUs to suit their cooling solutions. At best we can hope for laptop 1060-tier performance.

These are not APUs just so called Semi-custom ultrathin gaming form factor package APU is CPU + GPU which are on on the same single die and here this is not the case. Most Intel's CPUs are also APUs but they choose to not call it like that.

What you have here is Intel's APU (which Intel still calls just CPU even it is not really just CPU) plus AMD's mobile GPU put together in the same package, these are not in the same die so they are not APU.

It is just marketing term to avoid confusion in the same vendor area, but we could call it always as we wish - market will be and seems needs to be confused anyway

Better call these Kaby Lake G platform as Intel calls it, some will have Mobile GPU marked as GH and some will be GL.

https://ark.intel.com/products/coden...47/Kaby-Lake-G

GH are 100W models (probably also unlocked) and GL are 65W models (probably all locked) of package TDP

[Flaburgan]

This discussion on Intel Graphics integrated to the CPU with no choice is very interesting. However I tend to be on the Intel side here: I'm very happy to have this GPU in my Intel CPU. I don't know about Windows 8, I use only Ubuntu since 2008. But this small GPU "just works" out of the box. No wondering "which nvidia driver should I take?". Not afraid to try RC kernel, no need to use nomodset. I can plug several screens on my motherboard. I can watch video smoothly. Damn, with my UX31E Ultrabook from 2012 with a 2nd gen i5 in it, I'm able to play Left4Dead 2 at 30FPS. With an i5 7600k which have Iris, I can play Dead Island! However the game is not really smooth.
To me, that's the perfect solution for laptop. If someone wants to play recent games with nice performance, he will buy a desktop computer anyway.

[eduperez]

I don't have any problems with Intel's fixed function hardware, my problem is with their GPU. It simply doesn't have enough performance or capabilities to run a modern desktop operating system adequately and it hasn't really ever since the very first one launched. Even in 1997 when the first IGP launched it was already years outdated. By the time unified shader architectures became the norm when ATi released r600 and when nVidia released G80, that's right when Intel should have done something.... The point is that GPU they have is so hopelessly ancient it has no chance going forward. And that's been the status quo for a long time. If you need any kind of 3d performance, even for just running a desktop, then Intel's GPU is not adequate. Which means that Intel's GPU is not adequate for almost every single person.

Well, my i5-4430, launched on the second quarter of 2013, that contains a HD-4600 GPU, is still more than enough for my desktop needs... I think that saying something is worthless because it does not meet your needs, or the needs of the people you assume are going to buy it, is an error.

[henrymiller]

We may finally have a laptop with radeon graphics that sort of works, because that hybrid/switchable mess with both Intel HD and Radeon HD is terrible.

[henrymiller]

We may finally have a laptop with radeon graphics that sort of works, because those switchable hybrid systems with both Intel HD and Radeon HD are such a mess.

[dungeon]

This discussion on Intel Graphics integrated to the CPU with no choice is very interesting.

That is because traditionally Intel does not participate in dGPU segment, nVidia does not participate in low-end segment, but AMD participate in all segments

So traditionally and when you know that, if you wanna joke with Intel users you ask them "where is your dGPU" or if you wanna joke with nVidia user you would ask "where is your cheap thing" or if you wanna joke with AMD user you would "OK, so you are everywhere but where is your the right thing"

Workstation, enthusiastic and performance GPU market segments are always ruled by dGPUs . Now, mainstream is sometimes somewhat touched by top iGPU solutions and of course entry or value segment users are ruled by iGPUs instead

Now, current and future AAA games are ruled by dGPU-only really no one targets iGPUs there, but mostly by mainstream game consoles capabilities and then of course by enthusiastic/performance PC market and so on... which means value and mainstream segments will always or at least sometimes cry here and there and to play catch-up game

With so many segments it is easy for an average Joe to get confused, as how much and to what extend all these segments might or not relate to each other is hard to answer especially when user have no idea in which segment he is or how much performance expectation from XYZ GPU is enough for future when nothing is enough as we don't know future - so force push or force ignore technologies are solution

[duby229]

These are not APUs just so called Semi-custom ultrathin gaming form factor package APU is CPU + GPU which are on on the same single die and here this is not the case. Most Intel's CPUs are also APUs but they choose to not call it like that.

That's not true at all. An APU can be an MCM package as well. The only requirement to call it an APU is that the CPU and GPU have to be on the same socket.