AleksandarKour new discrete graphics for laptops.

No thanks, please make an actual discrete card.

Bwahahahaha

A laptop chip at 2x the perf of an IGP

In other words, Xe isn't finished at all, they just doubled the EU count of their old junk. In other words, perhaps we can extrapolate the perf of higher tier SKUs simply by comparing TDPs and some overhead.

28>40W including CPU

Nuff said.

Raja, you're an idiot, and Intel PR, surely you don't think we're this stupid?

Vayra86Raja, you're an idiot

No, he's not, he works for Intel!

Maybe I'mm wrong but wont laptop cards vs IGP increase weight and generated heat?

DeathtoGnomesNo, he's not, he works for Intel!

Maybe I'mm wrong but wont laptop cards vs IGP increase weight and generated heat?

28 vs 40 W says yes.
Weight? Depends how wide they made that GPU, maybe they can do it on heatpipe alone but that'd probably not be pretty.
But we don't even know clocks or anything, nor EU count. But if they need 12W to increase perf by 2x, there is no new tech to be had here, and if it is, it scales like absolute shit.

They'll need x15~x20 that perf to hit current day GPUs, that's some ugly math right there, and not even half counting the impact of memory as you scale up.

Are Intel saying: our laptop dgpu will be on par with vega 8?

Vayra86Weight? Depends how wide they made that GPU, maybe they can do it on heatpipe alone but that'd probably not be pretty.

Being 'pretty' isnt an issue when looking only at the outside, the inside doesnt have to be either, most laptops are throw away because repairs are more costly than a new one.

I didnt think about power requirements, battery life would matter to some too, not just heat. CPU without IGP + add in gpu (your 28+12) would have to be more than ideal (less than 40w? ) to maintain that 2x hype and still last over an hour while gaming, or whatever else would stress it out.

Single, Lowest SKU on the last day of the quarter.

Intel you continue to amaze and astonish by meeting your first quarter target. Barely. Lol!

2x performance claim based on average FPS at 1080p Medium with Metro Exodus (DX12)

According to notebookcheck the comparison iGPU gets 20 FPS in an old game on medium ... double the performance doesn't sound that great

So far new Intel tech seems to rely heavy on paper.

Oh a mobile DA, lmao, larrabee?

MescalambaSo far new Intel tech seems to rely heavy on paper.

yeah if you read the full Intel release on it, they even admit only the most played top 100 games/software items will be focused on at first and that there are several software things to work out still.

staying away with a ten foot pole.

sauce: www.techspot.com/news/93791-intel-arc-series-gpus-laptops-launch-march-30.html

If this is so, then it looks like Intel has finally refined the method of making E-waste - in both divisions, CPU and GPU.

WOW! Negativity much everyone?

Here's what stood out to me in the article: 2x Mobile IGP performance at only 28w.

Perhaps I'm a little slow, but that seems like a win. Let the flaming commence..

6800U (2.2GHz) is going to be around 1.8X vs 5800U and 6900HS (2.4GHz) 2X vs 5900HS if AMD preview numbers are indicative.So essentially Lisa is saying (if the "up to 2X" really means "2X on average" which is not...) that full 128EU discreet mobile solution is going to be needed just to match 6900HS IGP performance at 1080p. Is this good? Certainly not!
Well let's just say that A380 is going to be +25% vs 370M:
videocardz.com/newz/intel-arc-a380-desktop-to-be-23-faster-than-arc-a370m-mobile
then if A380 clocks don't change, imo you can extrapolate that A380 is going to be at RX 570 level ($169 SRP 5 years ago) at 1080p and A780 at RTX 3070 ($499 SRP 1,5 year ago - if A780 is Q2 2022) level at 4K in the absolute best case scenario. SRP pricing better be competitive then...

DavenSingle, Lowest SKU on the last day of the quarter.

Intel you continue to amaze and astonish by meeting your first quarter target. Barely. Lol!

Kind of reminds me of Cannon Lake, one SKU which existed basically so Intel could say they had 10nm out.

odd

I mean do they not still make iris integrated graphics?

Hasn't this low cost, low power chip been around for a while already?

AusWolfHasn't this low cost, low power chip been around for a while already?

I'm not sure that is still valid being almost a year old, the cards really havent officially launched.

DeathtoGnomesI'm not sure that is still valid being almost a year old, the cards really havent officially launched.

Even if they had launched, they're only compatible with certain Intel chipsets. Maybe Intel figured they would make better use in a laptop.

DarkDreamsAccording to notebookcheck the comparison iGPU gets 20 FPS in an old game on medium ... double the performance doesn't sound that great

Its not double
"The first Intel Arc discrete graphics products to enter the mobile market will enable up to a 2X improvement in graphics performance vs. integrated graphics alone"

Is the i7-1280P supposed to be the successor of the Tiger Lake G-series (e.g. i5-1135G7, i7-1195G7, etc.)? I'd be interested in 14-cores in an ultraportable.

I know they brought back the U-series (which was initially thought to be replaced by the "0" Tiger Lake Gs, like the i5-1130G7 and i7-1160G7, etc.) with the i7-1250U and i7-1265U series, which all have 96 EU Xe graphics.

usinameIts not double
"The first Intel Arc discrete graphics products to enter the mobile market will enable up to a 2X improvement in graphics performance vs. integrated graphics alone"

I just read the whole statement (previously I also commented negatively because the question was about A370M and I just focused on the "up to 2X part" of the statement)
I'll try to paint a positive picture of this:
Since the statement is in plural, it probably refers to Arc A370M/A350M/Iris Xe Max A200M products that will be launched at the same time, hence the "up to 2X" part. So essentially the message could just be 2X for A370M and less than 2X for the rest. Also I saw some fps results in Notebookcheck regarding AMD 680M and the performance is probably around -10% of what AMD's release performance slides are suggesting. Also 1280P IGP should be around 10% faster on average than Vega 8 (5900HS). If you really (I mean really) stretch it, you could end with A370M performance being 35% faster vs 680M 6800U 2.2GHz iteration. So regarding A380 you are back at -5-10% vs 1650 Super. So essentially we're back at the original performance assumptions, so I guess we just have to wait for some valid comparisons then.

Vayra86Bwahahahaha

A laptop chip at 2x the perf of an IGP

That is more than NV's MX-es are. And those are sold in millions.

ModEl4I just read the whole statement (previously I also commented negatively because the question was about A370M and I just focused on the "up to 2X part" of the statement)
I'll try to paint a positive picture of this:
Since the statement is in plural, it probably refers to Arc A370M/A350M/Iris Xe Max A200M products that will be launched at the same time, hence the "up to 2X" part. So essentially the message could just be 2X for A370M and less than 2X for the rest. Also I saw some fps results in Notebookcheck regarding AMD 680M and the performance is probably around -10% of what AMD's release performance slides are suggesting. Also 1280P IGP should be around 10% faster on average than Vega 8 (5900HS). If you really (I mean really) stretch it, you could end with A370M performance being 35% faster vs 680M 6800U 2.2GHz iteration. So regarding A380 you are back at -5-10% vs 1650 Super. So essentially we're back at the original performance assumptions, so I guess we just have to wait for some valid comparisons then.

Lot of unknowns till they launch. AMD has been notorious for using marketing lingo like that. Might not be terrible until Intel starts focusing their marketing on performance per watt. Then you know it's just stretching for anything to make it sound better.

At this point, the best competitor to GPU industry would be Apple suddenly whipping out a GPU based on their M1s. I'm more impressed by those than I've been with any GPU in the last decade. Hate the appliance nature of it but, gotta give them props for showing Intel and AMD their IGP graphics really do suck.

ModEl4I just read the whole statement (previously I also commented negatively because the question was about A370M and I just focused on the "up to 2X part" of the statement)
I'll try to paint a positive picture of this:
Since the statement is in plural, it probably refers to Arc A370M/A350M/Iris Xe Max A200M products that will be launched at the same time, hence the "up to 2X" part. So essentially the message could just be 2X for A370M and less than 2X for the rest. Also I saw some fps results in Notebookcheck regarding AMD 680M and the performance is probably around -10% of what AMD's release performance slides are suggesting. Also 1280P IGP should be around 10% faster on average than Vega 8 (5900HS). If you really (I mean really) stretch it, you could end with A370M performance being 35% faster vs 680M 6800U 2.2GHz iteration. So regarding A380 you are back at -5-10% vs 1650 Super. So essentially we're back at the original performance assumptions, so I guess we just have to wait for some valid comparisons then.

Dont stop here, little more bullsh1s and A370 will be faster than 3090ti+6900XTX combined