Broadwell Laptops with the 28W SKUs (and HD 6000 graphics)

[firewolfsm]

I've been searching, but can't find a single laptop using the higher TDP SKUs (which should run faster and with more EUs on the iGPU) besides the MacBook 13". No Windows options? Do we have to wait until Skylake to see these types of models show up?

I have a Lenovo X220 and it fits a 35W processor, which a less integrated PCH, in a small laptop with good battery life. Unfortunately, all equivalent laptops now are stuck using cut down 15W processors now.

 

[duskkk]

They don't exist because there is little interest. I suspect the Asus and Acer Haswell will get updates with Skylake. Generally a 940M (15W) +15W CPU is the better deal. Same power, more battery life under medium load, same under low/full load. Double the performance. Little difference in CPU performance thanks to Turbo boost.
All this while Intel charges more for that one chip than a 940M + a 15W core i5 costs.
The only benefit of the 28W chips is that the logic board can be smaller. Otherwise they are just worse in every respect. Especially on Windows where graphics switching isn't as broken as it is on OSX.
Apple uses them because they are stubborn not because they make sense.
Get a 940M + 15W Broadwell notebook or stick with the 15W chips. Forget about the 28W ones.

 

[Commodus]

They don't exist because there is little interest. I suspect the Asus and Acer Haswell will get updates with Skylake. Generally a 940M (15W) +15W CPU is the better deal. Same power, more battery life under medium load, same under low/full load. Double the performance. Little difference in CPU performance thanks to Turbo boost.
All this while Intel charges more for that one chip than a 940M + a 15W core i5 costs.
The only benefit of the 28W chips is that the logic board can be smaller. Otherwise they are just worse in every respect. Especially on Windows where graphics switching isn't as broken as it is on OSX.
Apple uses them because they are stubborn not because they make sense.
Get a 940M + 15W Broadwell notebook or stick with the 15W chips. Forget about the 28W ones.

Yeah, I'm sure Apple is really regretting its decision to get 10 hours of real-world battery life and good performance out of a laptop with a 2560x1600 display.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Yeah, I'm sure Apple is really regretting its decision to get 10 hours of real-world battery life and good performance out of a laptop with a 2560x1600 display.

The Zenbook UX303LN in Notebookcheck gets same battery life as the Macbook Pro 13 while the latter has 50% larger battery size.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-Retina-13-Early-2015-Notebook-Review.139621.0.html

Even if you assume that the Retina display counts for the 50% difference in battery life, the Zenbook has a GPU that's still more than 50% faster.

If the Skylake GT3e turns out to be 2x the performance it may still not be competitive with the discrete counterpart and end up even more expensive than now.

I don't know what's the point of "Iris" parts(both Iris and Iris Pro) other than that with brute force they claim they can beat AMD while in reality no one wants to use them.

 

[Commodus]

The Zenbook UX303LN in Notebookcheck gets same battery life as the Macbook Pro 13 while the latter has 50% larger battery size.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-Retina-13-Early-2015-Notebook-Review.139621.0.html

Even if you assume that the Retina display counts for the 50% difference in battery life, the Zenbook has a GPU that's still more than 50% faster.

If the Skylake GT3e turns out to be 2x the performance it may still not be competitive with the discrete counterpart and end up even more expensive than now.

I don't know what's the point of "Iris" parts(both Iris and Iris Pro) other than that with brute force they claim they can beat AMD while in reality no one wants to use them.

Here's a question: are you really going to play intensive games with either? No, you aren't. And is whatever GPU boost you get in certain tasks worth the dip in CPU performance? The Core i5 in the MacBook Pro outperforms the i7 in the UX303LN in computation-heavy tests, and this is in a system that's both thinner overall and only slightly heavier. You're not making much of a sacrifice by getting Apple's bigger battery and more powerful processor, in other words. ASUS' system may be better if you're occasionally firing up an older game, but I'd much rather have the MacBook Pro if I was going to do more productive tasks like editing media or juggling a lot of apps at once.

Iris is there to create a more balanced processor -- you can get beefier CPU power in a long-lasting, thin laptop without having to give up decent graphics that can drive something like a Retina display. The world doesn't revolve around gaming, folks, and Iris makes a lot of sense in certain contexts.

 

[sm625]

Here is a review of a 28W NUC:

http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews...-nuc5i7ryh-w-i7-5557u-review?showall=&start=4

There are a few gaming benchmarks which show the 28W SKU is about 20% faster than the 15W SKU.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Iris is there to create a more balanced processor -- you can get beefier CPU power in a long-lasting, thin laptop without having to give up decent graphics that can drive something like a Retina display.

Iris is not balanced at all. Reviews have shown Maxwell discrete parts can actually beat it in perf/watt, like not only in idle but running full on games battery. So much so Nvidia uses that fact in their marketing presentations: http://images.anandtech.com/doci/7834/NVIDIA-GeForce-800M-Slides (26).jpg There's a reason only one or two manufacturers uses them. In Broadwell generation its literally only Apple that uses them.

And of course gaming matters, if you are going to pay the extra for Iris/Iris Pro enabled parts. But as I was saying, regular parts + discrete are better in almost every aspects - price/battery life/performance.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested/19

From talking to OEMs, NVIDIA seems to offer better performance at equivalent pricing with their GT 740M/750M solutions, which is why many PC OEMs have decided to go that route for their Haswell launch platforms.

Not exactly a glowing review for the Iris Pro part is it? Now imagine that regular Iris parts are even worse.

 

[Commodus]

Iris is not balanced at all. Reviews have shown Maxwell discrete parts can actually beat it in perf/watt, like not only in idle but running full on games battery. So much so Nvidia uses that fact in their marketing presentations: http://images.anandtech.com/doci/7834/NVIDIA-GeForce-800M-Slides (26).jpg There's a reason only one or two manufacturers uses them. In Broadwell generation its literally only Apple that uses them.

And of course gaming matters, if you are going to pay the extra for Iris/Iris Pro enabled parts. But as I was saying, regular parts + discrete are better in almost every aspects - price/battery life/performance.

Balanced processor. Not balanced GPU. All the graphics power in the world won't matter if you're running a task that needs raw computing muscle more than anything else, and it's not always practical (due to space, energy or cost constraints) to include dedicated video alongside a "full" mobile processor.

Also, I'd like to welcome you to a world outside of gaming. Not everyone wants faster graphics in their laptop because they're trying to play Witcher 3 on the road. Many want the boost to run a second display while they're editing video, or to make sure that the interface keeps up when juggling a bunch of intensive 2D apps. Iris is about giving you a bump in visual performance without having to resort to a weaker CPU or building a bulkier machine. That's it -- any gaming is just icing on the cake.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Now that I think on it, I don't think we even have quad core broadwell chips do we? I'd probably simply write off broadwell for a serious gaming platform at this point. Shame, would be nice to have a gaming laptop that can scale from sub GHz speed when on the go (perhaps targeting 15 hour browsing battery via giant battery and low speeds), to trading blows with full blown desktop machines when plugged in, and everything in-between. I'd happily sacrifice weight for such a machine, though I'm in a very fringe niche that no one cares about.

(Basically put, I want just one machine to handle the full spectrum of my compute needs )

 

[Commodus]

Now that I think on it, I don't think we even have quad core broadwell chips do we? I'd probably simply write off broadwell for a serious gaming platform at this point. Shame, would be nice to have a gaming laptop that can scale from sub GHz speed when on the go (perhaps targeting 15 hour browsing battery via giant battery and low speeds), to trading blows with full blown desktop machines when plugged in, and everything in-between. I'd happily sacrifice weight for such a machine, though I'm in a very fringe niche that no one cares about.

(Basically put, I want just one machine to handle the full spectrum of my compute needs )

Quad-core Broadwell could theoretically show up around Computex in early June, although it's not certain that systems will be ready around then. Apple's decision to keep Haswell in the latest 15-inch MacBook Pro suggests that it doesn't see quad-core Broadwell being ready for prime time (at least, not in configurations it wants) for at least a few months.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Quad-core Broadwell could theoretically show up around Computex in early June, although it's not certain that systems will be ready around then. Apple's decision to keep Haswell in the latest 15-inch MacBook Pro suggests that it doesn't see quad-core Broadwell being ready for prime time (at least, not in configurations it wants) for at least a few months.

Agreed, even if performance improvements were less than 5% overall, Apple would most certainly jump on the power savings and smaller package given the opportunity. With this in mind, it would hardly be surprising if the first 14nm quad core part we get is based on Skylake.