AMD Ryzen 7 CPUs Shipping 2 March, Pre-Order Today

[duby229]

Correct but arguable. APU's are still quite under-performing, it's better customer/gaming experience to get discrete graphics card. If you do not game, it does not matter either. For office usage scenarious, it's iGPU is perfectly okay. So, for any uses, except for gaming, it's in the same market segment.

Nobody I know has bought Intel i5 or i7 because it's iGPU performance, they still always get discrete card. So the "similar graphics experience costing hundreds of dollars more" is sort of questionable claim as well. Half-assed GPU is in my eyes equal to useless. I would not even want to pay for it, reason I went for Xeon CPU (which were actually cheaper than equally well-performing i7's) after selling my FX8350. I doubt I was the irregular case either, since Gigabyte marketed bunch of consumer boards for such Xeon users..
http://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Intel-C236-C232

I can agree with that. I mean we all know that every GPU Intel has ever made up until Iris was a complete waste of engineering. The only thing Inte'l GPU ever did for them was allow them to use the CPU market position to forcefully leverage their completely worthless GPU on customers. Really it's just another iteration of Intel's typical antitrust behavior. As proven beyond any doubt by the fact that Intel's GPU is the most unused hardware that you simply can't -not- buy.

EDIT: Anybody who says Intel's GPU is adequate for Office usage has never used a 845 on XP or a Ironlake on Vista or a Sandybridge on 8.1.... Way too many times in history Intel has released hardware claiming support for OS interfaces that it simply wasn't anywhere near fast enough to run it. That's why I make decent money even still selling GPU upgrades.

[aht0]

I can agree with that. I mean we all know that every GPU Intel has ever made up until Iris was a complete waste of engineering. The only thing Inte'l GPU ever did for them was allow them to use the CPU market position to forcefully leverage their completely worthless GPU on customers. Really it's just another iteration of Intel's typical antitrust behavior. As proven beyond any doubt by the fact that Intel's GPU is the most unused hardware that you simply can't -not- buy.

EDIT: Anybody who says Intel's GPU is adequate for Office usage has never used a 845 on XP or a Ironlake on Vista or a Sandybridge on 8.1.... Way too many times in history Intel has released hardware claiming support for OS interfaces that it simply wasn't anywhere near fast enough to run it. That's why I make decent money even still selling GPU upgrades.

umm, yeah. Haven't used 845, you are correct in this.
Agree also with the rest of it.