AMD to create GPUs for intel

S

shad0w4life

Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
689
razor1 said:
Only in laptops, and these are not for the cheapo systems, they will be very expensive and won't offer much more over Raven Ridge outside of CPU performance.
Click to expand...

What's the advantage over a mobile Quadro in MXM, though? Latency and bandwidth?

I mean okay, this might be "useful" for mobile workstations where HBM2's ECC features are interesting. Though why not Intel + Mobile Quadros is beyond me.

This product seems to target a segment where cost isn't a big issue, and there Nvidia has a stranglehold.
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
What's the advantage over a mobile Quadro in MXM, though? Latency and bandwidth?

I mean okay, this might be "useful" for mobile workstations where HBM2's ECC features are interesting. Though why not Intel + Mobile Quadros is beyond me.

This product seems to target a segment where cost isn't a big issue, and there Nvidia has a stranglehold.
Click to expand...


Yeah exactly it should have less latency and bandwidth but that isn't going to over come the raw horsepower. Have to wait and see, maybe this is a proof of concept? Intel's way of getting out of the IGP side of things?

I really think its a specific market and not one it will do well in. Now they can do other form factors, that would be interesting. Like workstation tablets? Which isn't possible for current MXM designs. That might be something they can push into.

But still horsepower is needed, I don't see a Vega chip with thermal constraints doing that well, at least not well enough to go up against nV in laptops in gaming or workstation loads. Maybe hybrid users that need a little be of workstation needs and a little bit of gaming.....

BTW I think Intel licensed AMD products, because otherwise they would not be able to access HBM with both the CPU and GPU at the same time. That means Intel would need a much more in depth understanding of how AMD's GPU access HBM to have better memory integration.

This is the "mysterious IP deal"
 
single stack of HBM, even underclocked presumes 180-240 GB of bandwidth.

as has been noted elsewhere that is GTX1060/RX580 levels of bandwidth, so I can only presume it comes with an equivalent quota of vega throughput.

2048 vega shaders, clocked at 1GHz... In other words - a Vega11, in a laptop.
 
razor1 said:
Yeah exactly it should have less latency and bandwidth but that isn't going to over come the raw horsepower. Have to wait and see, maybe this is a proof of concept? Intel's way of getting out of the IGP side of things?

I really think its a specific market and not one it will do well in. Now they can do other form factors, that would be interesting. Like workstation tablets? Which isn't possible for current MXM designs. That might be something they can push into.

But still horsepower is needed, I don't see a Vega chip with thermal constraints doing that well, at least not well enough to go up against nV in laptops in gaming or workstation loads. Maybe hybrid users that need a little be of workstation needs and a little bit of gaming.....

BTW I think Intel licensed AMD products, because otherwise they would not be able to access HBM with both the CPU and GPU at the same time. That means Intel would need a much more in depth understanding of how AMD's GPU access HBM to have better memory integration.

This is the "mysterious IP deal"
Click to expand...

Would this be a "licensing IP" deal through? My impression is a semi-custom job akin to consoles, AMD provides the chips to Intel to put on the boards. The IP deal was also a one-off deal. While I suppose Lisa Su could have decided money is money, i would think AMD would sell for something of more long term benefit.
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
Yeah exactly it should have less latency and bandwidth but that isn't going to over come the raw horsepower. Have to wait and see, maybe this is a proof of concept? Intel's way of getting out of the IGP side of things?

I really think its a specific market and not one it will do well in. Now they can do other form factors, that would be interesting. Like workstation tablets? Which isn't possible for current MXM designs. That might be something they can push into.

But still horsepower is needed, I don't see a Vega chip with thermal constraints doing that well, at least not well enough to go up against nV in laptops in gaming or workstation loads. Maybe hybrid users that need a little be of workstation needs and a little bit of gaming.....

BTW I think Intel licensed AMD products, because otherwise they would not be able to access HBM with both the CPU and GPU at the same time. That means Intel would need a much more in depth understanding of how AMD's GPU access HBM to have better memory integration.

This is the "mysterious IP deal"
Click to expand...

https://www.pcworld.com/article/323...md-ship-a-core-chip-with-radeon-graphics.html

Though both companies helped engineer the new chip, this is Intel’s project—Intel first approached AMD, both companies confirmed. AMD, for its part, is treating the Radeon core as a single, semi-custom design, in the same vein as the chips it supplies to consoles like the Microsoft Xbox One X and Sony Playstation 4. Some specifics, though, remain undisclosed: Intel refers to it as a single product, though it seems possible that it could eventually be offered at a range of clock speeds.
Click to expand...

One interesting wrinkle: Intel will be responsible for supplying the drivers for the Radeon GPU, though company engineers won’t write the original code. An Intel representative said they’re working closely with AMD’s Radeon business to supply “day one” drivers for new games, when those drivers become available.
Click to expand...

(AMD also said it closed an unspecified patent licensing transaction “which positively impacted revenue,” though officials confirmed that the Intel deal wasn’t it.)
Click to expand...

“We’re constantly looking at different things inside AMD, but this is really Intel’s project,” said Scott Herkelman, the corporate vice president and general manager within the Radeon Gaming business unit within AMD. “It’s completely semicustom...I wouldn’t say that we’re going to take this and learn something from it. This is Intel’s project, and we’re helping them execute on it.”

Last January, speculation rose that Intel and AMD had signed a Radeon licensing deal, prompting talk that Intel might be preparing to lay off or otherwise get rid of its own integrated graphics development teams. Walker denied it. “Not at all,” he said.

“As we drive mainstream thin and light to 15mm and lower, the Intel UHD solution is still the market leader in terms of how graphics gets delivered on a PC platform,” Walker added. Nor has Intel licensed the EMIB technology to AMD, he said.

AMD representatives went further, stating that there is no patent or IP licensing in place between the two firms at all.
Click to expand...

The latter two questions can be answered in broad strokes. The idea, according to an AMD representative, is that these notebooks won’t be priced in the value segment at all, but in the neighborhood of $1,200 to $1,400 apiece. Meanwhile, Intel executives say that notebook PCs based on the new H-series, Core-Radeon modules will move gaming-class graphics down from systems 26mm thick, to thin-and-light PCs at 16mm and even 11mm thick — that’s slimmer than the original 13-inch Apple MacBook Air, and priced accordingly. (To get a sense of just how thin this is, see our 2012 review of the Acer Aspire S5. A laptop based on the Core-Radeon module would be far, far more powerful, however.)

An AMD representative also said that there’s nothing prohibiting any AMD graphics technology like VSR from being included in the Core-Radeon chip—but that in terms of specifics, it’s up to Intel to decide.
Click to expand...
 
razor1 said:
So Intel licensed the IP to create the chip, its their chip, just like MS and Sony for their consoles. Since Intel makes its own chips, AMD gets a licensing fee and that's it.

Sounds like it might be able to take on a gtx 1050 system by the way they are saying pricing will be at it.
Click to expand...

No, you missed this quote.
(AMD also said it closed an unspecified patent licensing transaction “which positively impacted revenue,” though officials confirmed that the Intel deal wasn’t it.)
Click to expand...

That quote refers to the one-off IP transaction deal we heard in the Q3 conference call. The way MS and Sony do it is buying the semi-custom chips, AMD orders it (and pays for it) at TSMC. AMD also refers to this intel deal as completely semi-custom.
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
So Intel licensed the IP to create the chip, its their chip, just like MS and Sony for their consoles. Since Intel makes its own chips, AMD gets a licensing fee and that's it.

Sounds like it might be able to take on a gtx 1050 system by the way they are saying pricing will be at it.
Click to expand...

You should have read the whole article, here is a quote " AMD representatives went further, stating that there is no patent or IP licensing in place between the two firms at all."
 
SighTurtle said:
No, you missed this quote.


That quote refers to the one-off IP transaction deal we heard in the Q3 conference call. The way MS and Sony do it is buying the semi-custom chips, AMD orders it (and pays for it) at TSMC. AMD also refers to this intel deal as completely semi-custom.
Click to expand...

OK two different deals, this one won't show up till mid 2018.

I think Intel has be making these chips in their fabs, I don't think its made at TSMC.

And on Gideon's post

There has to be IP licensing involved, if Intel has access to driver code, not to mention Intel and AMD created the chip TOGETHER.

What AMD representatives were talking about was for IGP to use AMD tech, that is not in place and will never be. And to reference what the question asked was looked like it was for AMD to use EMIB tech from Intel, which Intel stated there is no IP licensing to AMD for that.

If this thing is launching mid next year, we are looking at 12/10nm chips, yeah 1050 performance not enough, that will be lower then the lowest end discrete chips.

So this is not Vega 11 or 12, this is Vega 2.0.
 
razor1 said:
OK two different deals, this one won't show up till mid 2018.

I think Intel has be making these chips in their fabs, I don't think its made at TSMC.

And on Gideon's post

There has to be IP licensing involved, if Intel has access to driver code, not to mention Intel and AMD created the chip TOGETHER.

What AMD representatives were talking about was for IGP to use AMD tech, that is not in place and will never be. And to reference what the question asked was looked like it was for AMD to use EMIB tech from Intel, which Intel stated there is no IP licensing to AMD for that.

If this thing is launching mid next year, we are looking at 12nm chips, yeah 1050 performance not enough, that will be lower then the lowest end discrete chips.

So this is not Vega 11 or 12, this is Vega 2.0.
Click to expand...

You were wrong like usual and now you want to spin it. It's a custom design by Intel and AMD is making it, just like any custom order. I like how you try to stuff words into what AMD rep said to try to justify your spin. As for the performance will have to see.
 
razor1 said:
OK two different deals, this one won't show up till mid 2018.

I think Intel has be making these chips in their fabs, I don't think its made at TSMC.

And on Gideon's post

There has to be IP licensing involved, if Intel has access to driver code, not to mention Intel and AMD created the chip TOGETHER.

What AMD representatives were talking about was for IGP to use AMD tech, that is not in place and will never be. And to reference what the question asked was looked like it was for AMD to use EMIB tech from Intel, which Intel stated there is no IP licensing to AMD for that.

If this thing is launching mid next year, we are looking at 12/10nm chips, yeah 1050 performance not enough, that will be lower then the lowest end discrete chips.

So this is not Vega 11 or 12, this is Vega 2.0.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it still be better than anything that Intel has. :p
 
Chimpee said:
To be fair, it still be better than anything that Intel has. :p
Click to expand...

Definitely better lol.

Gideon said:
You were wrong like usual and now you want to spin it. It's a custom design by Intel and AMD is making it, just like any custom order. I like how you try to stuff words into what AMD rep said to try to justify your spin. As for the performance will have to see.
Click to expand...

LOL yeah ok Anarchist twin.

Performance will be seen but don't need to wait that long, we already can see the die sizes and we also know where AMD Vega slots in with die size and power consumption, we also know what GF's updated processes give in performance with similar power consumption. If its on Intel's 10nm process that will be a + for them since GF's fuck everything up.

They also gave us a price range, that is where they will compete at, we know what notebooks fall in that category, in 6 months what chips will be out? If they are going smaller and lighter for these chips, they are going to be more expensive products. Easy to see it won't be competing in the same areas as nV's low end notebook chips, its going to be in the middle of IGP/APU and discrete.
 
razor1 said:
Definitely better lol.



LOL yeah ok Anarchist twin.

Performance will be seen but don't need to wait that long, we already can see the die sizes and we also know where AMD Vega slots in with die size and power consumption, we also know what GF's updated processes give in performance with similar power consumption. If its on Intel's 10nm process that will be a + for them since GF's fuck everything up.

They also gave us a price range, that is where they will compete at, we know what notebooks fall in that category, in 6 months what chips will be out? If they are going smaller and lighter for these chips, they are going to be more expensive products. Easy to see it won't be competing in the same areas as nV's low end notebook chips, its going to be in the middle of IGP/APU and discrete.
Click to expand...

Spoken just like Shintai, oh wait it's razor1. You also thought HBM on a processor would not be happening, so I dont think I will take your thoughts on the performance seriously. Perhaps you can make some pretty graphic designs of what the logo will look like.
 
Gideon said:
Spoken just like Shintai, oh wait it's razor1. You also thought HBM on a processor would not be happening, so I dont think I will take your thoughts on the performance seriously. Perhaps you can make some pretty graphic designs of what the logo will look like.
Click to expand...


Might want to look back and see what I stated ;)

I stated there is an AMD and Intel CPU/GPU combo, something for a specific market and it wasn't going to be mainstream product for quite sometime ;) That was close to 6 months to a year ago!

If ya want I can find it for ya, it was around the time Kyle mentioned this IP deal......

Oops before ya make accusations and generalizations, might want look things up.
 
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1200...with-amd-radeon-graphics-with-hbm2-using-emib

At the bottom, Ian Cutress has added some more commentary about the deal. EMIB between HBM and GPU, PCIe connecting to CPU. Cutress thinks a good chance it's just Polaris maybe Intel might be paying top dollar for Vega. He also thinks potentially Intel could have sights on using it in parts that would compete with Ryzen Mobile. If so, at least Polaris would be behind Vega in that respect.
 
SighTurtle said:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1200...with-amd-radeon-graphics-with-hbm2-using-emib

At the bottom, Ian Cutress has added some more commentary about the deal. EMIB between HBM and GPU, PCIe connecting to CPU. Cutress thinks a good chance it's just Polaris maybe Intel might be paying top dollar for Vega. He also thinks potentially Intel could have sights on using it in parts that would compete with Ryzen Mobile. If so, at least Polaris would be behind Vega in that respect.
Click to expand...

Polaris in mid 2018 products? I certainly hope not.
 
razor1 said:
OK two different deals, this one won't show up till mid 2018.

I think Intel has be making these chips in their fabs, I don't think its made at TSMC.

And on Gideon's post

There has to be IP licensing involved, if Intel has access to driver code, not to mention Intel and AMD created the chip TOGETHER.

What AMD representatives were talking about was for IGP to use AMD tech, that is not in place and will never be. And to reference what the question asked was looked like it was for AMD to use EMIB tech from Intel, which Intel stated there is no IP licensing to AMD for that.

If this thing is launching mid next year, we are looking at 12/10nm chips, yeah 1050 performance not enough, that will be lower then the lowest end discrete chips.

So this is not Vega 11 or 12, this is Vega 2.0.
Click to expand...

https://www.pcper.com/news/Processors/Intel-Announces-New-CPUs-Integrating-AMD-Radeon-Graphics
At the bottom:
Update: We have been informed that AMD is producing the chips and selling them directly to Intel for integration into these new SKUs. There are no royalties or licensing, but the Semi-Custom division should still receive the revenue for these specialized products made only for Intel.
Click to expand...

Console model it is then. Probably will be made at TSMC like the console chips.
 
how much money can they make from this deal? I remember reading that theres hardly any money to be made with consoles, i hope this deal is a different kind where they can actually make something
 
illli said:
how much money can they make from this deal? I remember reading that theres hardly any money to be made with consoles, i hope this deal is a different kind where they can actually make something
Click to expand...
sometimes it is better to keep the doors open than risk higher margins. Until AMD can get better software "awareness" and community mind share as well as actual market share, then it is probably best to sell low and ensure some penetration than limit sales because of higher margins.
 
illli said:
how much money can they make from this deal? I remember reading that theres hardly any money to be made with consoles, i hope this deal is a different kind where they can actually make something
Click to expand...


Pretty much the same type of deal. Low margin market for AMD. Anything semi custom is lower margin, cause they aren't the ones marketing or selling the product, it all comes from the company ordering the product. Adding in a chip like this has the increased cost of dGPU + the added cost of HBM and interposer, hence why these products will be priced accordingly, but pricing it accordingly they will then go up against higher tier products which will cost around the same in different form factors and lower tier products which will be priced less with similar form factors.

End result is margins have to remain low since there is a ceiling and floor to the pricing structure.
 
razor1 said:
Pretty much the same type of deal. Low margin market for AMD. Anything semi custom is lower margin, cause they aren't the ones marketing or selling the product, it all comes from the company ordering the product. Adding in a chip like this has the increased cost of dGPU + the added cost of HBM and interposer, hence why these products will be priced accordingly, but pricing it accordingly they will then go up against higher tier products which will cost around the same in different form factors and lower tier products which will be priced less with similar form factors.

End result is margins have to remain low since there is a ceiling and floor to the pricing structure.
Click to expand...
This can help bring down cost at the Fabs for other chips, so more than one way to skin a cat. I really hope RTG/AMD does not hold back - meaning give/sell Intel the best they have. RTG/AMD will just have to up their own game to have a better competitive combo. Good products sell and can make money - just have to produce them and sell them.
 
Its a less powerful version of Polaris lol, its not that great of a chip. @ 35 watts TDP can't expect much from a GCN architecture. It will be directly competing against the gtx 1060 notebooks, and they are priced at the same price range, same TDP, very close to the same sizes, not sure about thickness, but that should be there too.
 
razor1 said:
Its a less powerful version of Polaris lol, its not that great of a chip. @ 35 watts TDP can't expect much from a GCN architecture. It will be directly competing against the gtx 1060 notebooks, and they are priced at the same price range, same TDP, very close to the same sizes, not sure about thickness, but that should be there too.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a waste of time using Polaris vice Vega, I don't think these should compete with the 1060 notebooks - battery life should be much better, package smaller etc. and of course performance worst. Probably Apple will gobble these up as fast as they can make them.
 
it won't compete with those, it will be less performance than those quite a bit less. Its going to be less than a rx 470, quite a bit less, the gtx 1060 laptops are around 5-15% less performance at 60 watt TDP, in that range depending on the notebook, thin and light vs the thicker ones.

I wouldn't be surprised it if it really ends up less than a gtx 1050ti. gtx 1050ti laptops are in the 35 watt range. Expecting Vega or Polaris to hit Pascal's TDP level is pretty crazy. Yeah its got HBM, but we saw that isn't going to save AMD in perf/watt race.
 
noko said:
Sounds like a waste of time using Polaris vice Vega, I don't think these should compete with the 1060 notebooks - battery life should be much better, package smaller etc. and of course performance worst. Probably Apple will gobble these up as fast as they can make them.
Click to expand...
Unless anyone has actual sources it's just speculation.

Some evidence points to Vega 11 (no Polaris chip uses HBM for one) and performance will probably approach a desktop 470
 
ecmaster76 said:
Unless anyone has actual sources it's just speculation.

Some evidence points to Vega 11 (no Polaris chip uses HBM for one) and performance will probably approach a desktop 470
Click to expand...
That would be awesome if around a 470. I wonder if these will be available for DIY setups, motherboard? I would love to make a Commodore 64 case work again. Also what cooler would one use? Almost looks like these will be OEMs/mobile only.
 
noko said:
That would be awesome if around a 470. I wonder if these will be available for DIY setups, motherboard? I would love to make a Commodore 64 case work again. Also what cooler would one use? Almost looks like these will be OEMs/mobile only.
Click to expand...

I doubt there will be a socketed version but maybe an integrated mini ITX/NUC version with bespoke cooling might come out. It wont be cheap so probably not many like that if any. They would be good for HTPCs or console/kiosk kinda solutions. Maybe even a Steam machine (I mean Intel using AMD graphics is cray enough why not)
 
noko said:
That would be awesome if around a 470. I wonder if these will be available for DIY setups, motherboard? I would love to make a Commodore 64 case work again. Also what cooler would one use? Almost looks like these will be OEMs/mobile only.
Click to expand...
No it's going to suck because anything AMD does has to suck according to some posters. Selling low margin, high volume product is bad for you if you're AMD..
Etc

The black pilling shilling is hilarious, along with constant comparison to muh nvidya..
 
N4CR said:
No it's going to suck because anything AMD does has to suck according to some posters. Selling low margin, high volume product is bad for you if you're AMD..
Etc

The black pilling shilling is hilarious, along with constant comparison to muh nvidya..
Click to expand...


Its low margin man, semicustom designs are ALWAYS low margin. Adding in another party to cut profits, have to factor in half the margins right off the bat. So if AMD was doing this on its own they would get 40-50% margins, but cut that right in half cause Intel has to make their cut. What is good margins 40% + right? What is AMD's current margins? 34%? Its not going to improve their margins. Poor margin products don't make a company successful.

Lets list out the low margin products AMD has

1) Consoles, Xbone and PS4
2) Slot machines
3) Graphics cards

Lets list out higher margin parts

1) CPU's

Yeah I don't see AMD's current strategy of low margin products, to sustain them in the future.

Cause if their CPU's are getting 40% + margins, which they should be, seem likely everything else they are doing is dragging their margins down

Now back to this specific product.

HBM memory extra cost
Intel's EMIB extra cost

Ceiling limit based on performance and form factor of product.

How are they going to get more margins then what they are getting now when Intel has to share profits (well buy from AMD and MAINTAIN Their profits margins)?

Can't happen right, so either Intel is eating the cost of the product or its split between AMD and Intel, most likely its split because AMD is DESPERATE for money. They are willing to do just about anything in the short term to keep their books in the black. Telling you right now, nothing will save them unless they can truly compete on all fronts with good products.
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
Its low margin man, semicustom designs are ALWAYS low margin. Adding in another party to cut profits, have to factor in half the margins right off the bat. So if AMD was doing this on its own they would get 40-50% margins, but cut that right in half cause Intel has to make their cut. What is good margins 40% + right? What is AMD's current margins? 34%? Its not going to improve their margins. Poor margin products don't make a company successful.

Lets list out the low margin products AMD has

1) Consoles, Xbone and PS4
2) Slot machines
3) Graphics cards

Lets list out higher margin parts

1) CPU's

Yeah I don't see AMD's current strategy of low margin products, to sustain them in the future.

Cause if their CPU's are getting 40% + margins, which they should be, seem likely everything else they are doing is dragging their margins down

Now back to this specific product.

HBM memory extra cost
Intel's EMIB extra cost

Ceiling limit based on performance and form factor of product.

How are they going to get more margins then what they are getting now when Intel has to share profits (well buy from AMD and MAINTAIN Their profits margins)?

Can't happen right, so either Intel is eating the cost of the product or its split between AMD and Intel, most likely its split because AMD is DESPERATE for money. They are willing to do just about anything in the short term to keep their books in the black. Telling you right now, nothing will save them unless they can truly compete on all fronts with good products.
Click to expand...

The point I'm getting at is AMD even with superior products, doesn't make a dent in market share typically because people pooh pooh them because AMD.

Them getting low margin parts throughout the marketplace gets the visibility and mindshare they are lacking. We've seen it multiple times in past where intvidia will shit on then with marketing and paid forum shills or stockholders, whenever they are doing things right. Same shit happened to Ryzen this time around but it was worse with the antitrust stuff intel did with Athlon 64.

Point is every time that red radeon or AMD logo is on a laptop or mentioned in a console review, with a decent product, for less, they are getting hearts and minds, which is what they need above all, in order to further improve their financials going forward.

They need a base and they are growing that base with these efforts.

Better than no contracts...
 
That is not the case, they get their sales, we saw that with Athlon 64, saw that with 9700, saw that with HD 48xx, HD 58xx, HD 68xx series. They got their marketshare when they had good products. Not only that their margins went up with those products too!

Low margin products don't give visibility and mindshare. GOOD products sustained over a LONG period of time gets visibility and mindshare.

You think consoles are good technologies? They are yester-year tech and always will be. Increased system cost is prohibitive in those markets.

Ryzen is an OK product, its not a great product, it gives nothing over what Intel has, short term it gave more cores vs. IPC, but that is being covered now it took Intel what 2 quarters. 2 Q's is not enough to see anything in visibility or mindshare.

Look at nV, when was it when they had a "bad" product. Well only once, Fx series. AMD, r600, Vega, Fiji.

Look at Intel, Pentium 4, look at AMD, Phenom, Phenom 2, BD, PD.

That is what we see in mindshare and visibility.

Why do you think Wall Street is seeing AMD for what its worth at this point and not when Ryzen was released or shown off. Cause well the other side of the coin, well more like both sides of the coin is taken up by nV and Intel. Its up to what they do to see how "successful" AMD will be able to penetrate.

AMD can't penetrate with similar products, let alone products that have glaring weaknesses, marketing never can solve these type of situations. OEM's, system builders, when having to give the choice of what to buy for their customers are going to delegate based on past numbers of how much to procure products, if AMD has 30% marketshare, they will procure 30% of their products for AMD the rest goes to Intel and nV, they will not go above that by much because they don't want left over stock.

Back to this specific product, by the time it comes out its going up against Volta or Ampere products. They are going to crush it. Lets say for some miracle it gets up to a 1060 notebook performance level. That is going to be entry level gaming performance mid 2018 with the next gen products.
 
shad0w4life said:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amd-delivers-semi-custom-graphics-141933083.html

https://newsroom.intel.com/editoria...nce-cpu-discrete-graphics-sleek-thin-devices/


"
The new product, which will be part of our 8thGen Intel Core family, brings together our high-performing Intel Core H-series processor, second generation High Bandwidth Memory (HBM2) and a custom-to-Intel third-party discrete graphics chip from AMD’s Radeon Technologies Group* – all in a single processor package.
"
Click to expand...
If only someone would have told us sooner....

https://www.jonpeddie.com/news/intel-builds-heterogeneous-chip

AMD chip code name is Palo Alto.
 
Man, I want one of these, that is if I can use a mITX motherboard and have a cooling solution to go along with it. Will have to see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top