Read more.Performance seems to sit somewhere between Nvidia's GeForce MX330 and MX350 GPUs.
Read more.Performance seems to sit somewhere between Nvidia's GeForce MX330 and MX350 GPUs.
You mean like AMD used to do via crossifre and then stopped supporting because 'multi gpu' just isn't popular with nvidia/amd anymore.it is thought that it will be able to stand out working in multi-GPU mode with the CPU's onboard Xe graphics.
Honestly the only area's I can see this being 'popular' is in 'Intel only' laptops or business pc's where Intel end up bundling everything together at a reduced price.
Why are they any more designed to work together than an Nvidia or AMD GPU with Intel CPU? In the end that really comes down to "do you trust the drivers", which is not a traditional Intel strong point.
I can see these being used so that laptops have the "discrete gpu" box ticked in the comparison sheet, partially subsidised by using a 'F' version of a CPU where the Xe IGP has been disabled basically getting you back to square one
No doubt Intel will do bundle CPU/GPU/chipset/Wiifi deals to the laptop makers.
First thing that pops into my head...unless the programs I (and many others) use end up supporting 'gpu processing' on the intel gpu, it's better for me to have an nvidia one due to cuda support in said programs. Then there's the obvious thing of not actually being the 'best choice' of gpu for gaming etc too.... no point putting a 'discrete' graphics card in if it's not the 'best choice' is there.
It's also arguably the same tactics that got intel in trouble with the EU over in relation to desktops....
To be fair can't be any worse than current Intel integrated gratingfix chips can it?
Old puter - still good enuff till I save some pennies!
So with mediocre performance and the Max name what will they be called when they're on-par with AMD/Nvidia...Max, Super, Extreme, Ultimate, Best'est.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)