Discussion Poll: Yes/No Full IGP version of mobile Ryzen 5 4600H?

[EliteRetard]

Reviews are quite positive for the 4900HS and it's IGP, I think it would be great if they offered lower cost H CPUs with that full IGP as well.
Reviews of the full 8 CU IGP show it's just as fast as (often much more than) a Nvidia MX150 / MX250 / MX330 / GT1030 (all rebadged same GPU)
Why force people to pay for all the compromises of a dGPU if they really don't need it? Higher price, weight, size, lower battery life etc.
Forcing people to the low performance U series is not the right attitude or answer either. "Only hardcore gam3rZ need high performance CPUS!"

A theoretical 4600HG (G for graphics, meaning FULL IGP) vs a U series + dGPU would be less complex and much cheaper to produce.
It should offer the same or better GPU and CPU performance in a similar total power envelope (15w CPU + 25w dGPU vs 35w to 45w APU).
Because of the dynamic nature of these new AMD APUs, they have the potential to entirely upset and change the current market.

I guess I'm just really enthusiastic about these new chips, and the large efficiency and performance gains they've brought.
I want to see designs using these powerful Ryzen H chips without a dGPU, the full IGP is good at no extra cost and fast enough for many.
Cutting down the IGP for no reason and trying to force it to also be a product differentiator is just a bad thing, the CPUs already do that.
Nobody is going to spend a lot more for a higher tier CPU they don't need just to get a better IGP, and it's disappointing to "settle for less".
Offering a full power IGP on cheaper tier CPUs however can pull people over from competitors that don't offer such performance for the price.
It literally costs nothing to keep the full IGP enabled on the lower tier chips, all the R&D manufacturing and hardware is physically there.

This is how I see things:

U series for the tech illiterate, for super light office work or web browsing only. Niche 90+ Wh units for maximum battery life.
HG series IGP ONLY for those who need a high performance CPU and sick of paying (cash, battery life, size, weight) for a dGPU they'll never use.
. . . 4600HG could be a great mid-range option, just the right mix of performance and efficiency, perfect for enthusiasts and light gaming normies.
H plus dGPU for the hardcore gamers or anybody who needs GPU power for specific workstation tasks.

What say the rest of you?

Edit: Slightly modified to suggest a full lineup of HG parts that would offer the full IGP. I think there could/should be full IGP only options from R3 all the way to R9. I focused on the R5 since it would be a great mainstream option, and the R9 is already a full IGP (and they need to offer laptops using them without dGPU). The current units with cut down IGP can be used in laptops with a dGPU for those who want that.

Random example: All else being equal (performance, chassis, screen, keyboard, wifi etc) what would you choose?

Intel U series + MX330 for $750 w/ 6hr battery and 4.5lb weight (higher cost due to added dGPU)
AMD HG (full IGP only) for $675 w/ 8hr battery and 4lb weight (higher battery life, lower weight due to lack of dGPU)

In actuality it's likely the AMD system would have a higher performing CPU since it can use the full 35-45w vs the 15w of a U series.
Unfortunately AMD isn't offering such a CPU/configuration because they are trying to conform to the standards Intel has set up to now.
Maybe, hopefully, by voicing my opinions and getting others to share we can catch the attention of somebody who can make it happen.

 

[EliteRetard]

Don't have a strong opinion on this but there are a ton of gotchas to such a SKU. Like how many users even care/know the difference? Too few I guess. Would just be confusing and then you get an sku that has worse CPU performance than an equally priced one but a better GPU. Most consumers wouldn't get it. Then there is tdp. Does it even fit in 15w with all CUs enabled? or how much cpu boost would you sacrifice?

The real problem is that the fully enabled SKUs will probably mostly ship with a dGPU.

I'm not sure how you got so confused yourself.

AMD just released their 4000 series CPUs for laptops, the performance CPUs are the H/HS series at 45w and 35w.

The 4900HS is one such chip that was just released, and reviewed by multiple sources in a gaming laptop.
It's the lower power version of their best CPU and has 8 cores 16 threads, and an IGP with 8CU at 35w.

This stock CPU performs on par with Intel's mobile 8 core i9-9980HK overclocked at 90w.
The 8CU IGP on the 4900HS outperforms most of the low end dGPUs currently used (listed in the OP).
This exact IGP is on every 4000 H/HS mobile CPU, but artificially cut down on the cheaper CPUs to perform worse.

Many people would love to have the CPU power of a 4900HS, and literally have no need for a dGPU.
Since the CPU actually has a good IGP already built in, my suggestion is to allow builds that have no dGPU.

Along with this, I wanted to see if anybody else would be interested in having the good full IGP available on lower priced CPUs.
Again the full IGP is already there on every chip, it's just artificially and partially turned off to reduce performance.
Since they have special low power versions already (the 35w HS), I suggest they make a special full IGP version (HG 35-45w).
This special full IGP version would be used only in designs without a dGPU, making the laptops much cheaper to produce.
The current CPUs with reduced IGP could be used in dGPU only units, since IGP performance doesn't matter then.

The reason people want the full IGP on lower tier CPUs is so they could get a performance laptop with fewer compromises.
Many people can't afford a dGPU, or don't want all of their compromises to size, weight, battery life, noise, heat, etc.
Since it costs nothing to leave the full IGP enabled, this would create a new market segment of laptops that's desperately needed.
Laptops with powerful CPUs at lower prices than dGPU gaming units, with an IGP that can perform as good as a basic dGPU.
Previously the only way to get a laptop without a dGPU was to buy a low power, low performance CPU from the U series (15w).

Basically up until now Intel has said "buy a slow crappy computer, or get a gaming machine".
AMD absolutely has the option to make that perfect middle ground, a lower cost high performance computer that's not gaming.

On top of all of this, AMD's 4900HS gaming laptop is turning in great battery life.
If they removed the expensive and power hungry dGPU from the laptop it could do even better.
Therefore AMD could make laptops low cost, high performance, with better battery life than Intel's low performance 15w U series.

What AMD is trying to do currently though is copy Intel's strategy: "buy a slow crappy U series 15w unit, or pay up and deal with a gaming rig".
That's a really unfortunate and shortsighted way to handle the laptop market. There's a huge middle ground they could cover that Intel can't.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Does it even fit in 15w with all CUs enabled? or how much cpu boost would you sacrifice?

A 4800u has 8CUs and fits in a 15W TDP (well, 10-25W cTDP) so presumably a 6c/12t version of the same chip would have no problem fitting in the same power envelope. It might even boost a little higher. From AMD's perspective, though, a hypothetical 4600HG would just cannibalize sales of the 4800u so why sell it? Maybe if the OEMs weren't crackheads, it would have its place in the notebook hierarchy. But . . .

The real problem is that the fully enabled SKUs will probably mostly ship with a dGPU.

I fully expect the 4800u, 4900HS, and 4900H to all ship with dGPUs. Pretty much every time.

 

[uzzi38]

I fully expect the 4800u, 4900HS, and 4900H to all ship with dGPUs. Pretty much every time.

Not always

 

[EliteRetard]

A 4800u has 8CUs and fits in a 15W TDP (well, 10-25W cTDP) so presumably a 6c/12t version of the same chip would have no problem fitting in the same power envelope. It might even boost a little higher. From AMD's perspective, though, a hypothetical 4600HG would just cannibalize sales of the 4800u so why sell it? Maybe if the OEMs weren't crackheads, it would have its place in the notebook hierarchy. But . . .



I fully expect the 4800u, 4900HS, and 4900H to all ship with dGPUs. Pretty much every time.

I really don't know why you are trying so hard to smash this down.

"How dare you propose a logical idea with some merit! Intel/OEMs say the way it should be, so just shut up already!"

According to you the only option should be a U series because "10-25 watt!!!" Obviously the H series cannibalizes the U series sales, and so do the desktop chips. How dare they offer a higher performance option for those who want it! Why even sell them?!

If all you care about is the U series and low power at the expense of everything else then whatever, they already have the product for you. Stop trying to crap on anybody who wants a good mid-grade high performance option. Again, not everybody who wants/needs a high performance CPU is a hardcore gamer (or cares to do so on a laptop). And just because they don't want a dGPU doesn't mean they want a low performance U series. Especially since the H series gaming laptops are getting 10+ hours on battery, clearly the H series IGP only can offer both the performance and battery life that people want, without the expense or compromises of a dGPU and/or U series laptop. Why is it so horrible to have something in between?

You keep insisting that the U series is the only way AMD can make money...that's ludicrous. If AMD can gain large market share by filling a huge hole in the mid-range laptop market, why should they ignore it just to compete in the same fields Intel set up? You think somehow an AMD + Nvidia gaming laptop makes AMD more money than the same laptop without the Nvidia GPU? If the AMD full IGP option is lower MSRP and more practical for most people, they should just ignore that because Intel and "OEMs" have never done it that way?

Bah! I'm stopping myself now before I get angry. Maybe I'll spar with you again tomorrow.

 

[AtenRa]

A 4800u has 8CUs and fits in a 15W TDP (well, 10-25W cTDP) so presumably a 6c/12t version of the same chip would have no problem fitting in the same power envelope. It might even boost a little higher. From AMD's perspective, though, a hypothetical 4600HG would just cannibalize sales of the 4800u so why sell it? Maybe if the OEMs weren't crackheads, it would have its place in the notebook hierarchy. But . . .

4800U is a 8Core 16Thread 15W TDP SKU

The 4600HG would be a 6Core 12Thread 35W TDP

Those two are not competing , they are in two different segments.

You do know that AMD has the 4800H/S and 4900H/S that the only real difference is ONE less CU in the iGPU ???

Personally and i believe most of the users around the globe dont need an 8Core 16Thread 15W TDP APU in a laptop.
But i would gladly buy a 6Core 6Threads 15W TDP APU with 8CUs to be able to do some work and also play some games.
Why i have to search to find a 6Core 15W TDP Laptop with a dGPU that will have the same or worst graphics performance than the 8CU iGPU the APU could offer at lower price ???

I strongly believe that AMD should release a 6Core SKU with Full iGPU soon both at 15W and 35W TDP.

 

[uzzi38]

I strongly believe that AMD should release a 6Core SKU with Full iGPU soon both at 15W and 35W TDP.

Not a big enough market for it, so it's not happening. The only time it will happen is if an OEM requests and is ready to pay a premium for it, which is also not happening.

Why? Because it lowers the incentive for people to buy the top end premium products. OEMs hate that. The only reason they ask for something more is if they know they won't be able to offer better (so they can't do an R7 SKU for some reason, idk what would cause that because power consumption isn't a constraint with Renoir) or they can also make the top end-sku better at the same time (like Microsoft did with Picasso, extra CU for both R5 and R7 SKUs).

AMD produces products for the general market. Their near and long term focus is on mass market stuff, and the only reason they'll shift away from that is semi-custom or if they can charge a premium for more. You either get what they ship normally, or you give them a damn good reason to ship something else, and by damn good reason I mean pay an extra premium.

 

[AtenRa]

Heh I took another look at the 4xxxU lineup and got another Gem,

R5 4500U is a 6Core 6Threads , 2.3GHz Base with 4GHz turbo and 6CUs iGPU @ 1500MHz
R5 4600U is a 6Core 12Threads , 2.1GHz Base with 4GHz turbo and 6CUs iGPU @ 1500MHz

R5 4600U would be fine IF the iGPU had 8CUs, but now its not worth it against the 4500U.

 

[AtenRa]

Not a big enough market for it, so it's not happening. The only time it will happen is if an OEM requests and is ready to pay a premium for it, which is also not happening.

Why? Because it lowers the incentive for people to buy the top end premium products. OEMs hate that. The only reason they ask for something more is if they know they won't be able to offer better (so they can't do an R7 SKU for some reason, idk what would cause that because power consumption isn't a constraint with Renoir) or they can also make the top end-sku better at the same time (like Microsoft did with Picasso, extra CU for both R5 and R7 SKUs).

AMD produces products for the general market. Their near and long term focus is on mass market stuff, and the only reason they'll shift away from that is semi-custom or if they can charge a premium for more. You either get what they ship normally, or you give them a damn good reason to ship something else, and by damn good reason I mean pay an extra premium.

Just tell me who is going to buy a Laptop with a 15W TDP 8Cores 16Threads only because he/she wants the Full iGPU ??

Even I and most PC enthusiasts will not opt for a 8Core 16Thread 15W TDP APU for a lpatop, i prefer to get a 15W 6Core 6Threads with a dGPU that will have the same performance as the full iGPU.
Just make a poll and check if you believe otherwise.

And since the vast majority of the Laptops comes with NVIDIA entry level dGPUs, AMD just give money to its competitor when cheaper SKUs doesnt have Full iGPUs

 

[uzzi38]

Just tell me who is going to buy a Laptop with a 15W TDP 8Cores 16Threads only because he/she wants the Full iGPU ??

Even I and most PC enthusiasts will not opt for a 8Core 16Thread 15W TDP APU for a lpatop, i prefer to get a 15W 6Core 6Threads with a dGPU that will have the same performance as the full iGPU.
Just make a poll and check if you believe otherwise.

And since the vast majority of the Laptops comes with NVIDIA entry level dGPUs, AMD just give money to its competitor when cheaper SKUs doesnt have Full iGPUs

Nobody, because nobody buys a laptop solely for the full iGPU. For the laptop market, the CPU side iGPUs. Stop assuming your own needs would sell well.

iGPUs are irrelevant to OEMs. Completely and utterly irrelevant. They don't care if you would prefer a 6c6t APU with a full iGPU, they'll sell you the 4800U regardless with the 4600U as the cut down version anyway. Why? Because that's where the biggest margins lie.

And you don't understand OEMs if you think a better iGPU is enough to dissuade them from slapping anemic dGPUs to their solid iGPU products. There are laptops with MX130s (or was it MX230s, I forget now) put alongside a 1065G7.

What AMD would be doing for certain is wasting money on products that wouldn't be used by anyone. Simple as.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Not always

Oh okay, they've got the 4800H with dGPUs as well. Brilliant!

I really don't know why you are trying so hard to smash this down.

I don't know why you're trying so hard to prop it up. See comment by uzzi38 below.

"How dare you propose a logical idea with some merit! Intel/OEMs say the way it should be, so just shut up already!"

If that's all you're getting out of it then you are either predisposed to overt hostility towards anyone who dares contradict you, or just aren't being terribly thoughtful.

4800U is a 8Core 16Thread 15W TDP SKU

The 4600HG would be a 6Core 12Thread 35W TDP

Those two are not competing , they are in two different segments.

Why in God's name would you sell a 35W TDP APU like that? Then you're cannibalizing sales of the 4900HS, which is even worse than killing sales of the 4800u. Okay, go ahead and go back to my comments where I mentioned the 4800u and sub in 4900HS.

Stop assuming your own needs would sell well.

That's part of the issue. One of the pitfalls of being a forum warrior is assuming people would buy something if it would suit our purposes. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing a product like that, but the last thing I want to see is AMD get beaten up (again!) by going through all the trouble of binning out a separate SKU just for it to a). not sell or worse b). make it harder for them to sell higher-margin parts.

In a perfect world, you'd be able to get exactly the APU, RAM, storage, screen, dGPU (if any), and whatever other features you wanted in a laptop. In the real world, that rarely happens. Even if you're willing to pay for the best of everything, it could still have something wrong with it. It's why I personally hate laptops and why I still build my own computers.

They don't care if you would prefer a 6c6t APU with a full iGPU, they'll sell you the 4800U regardless

Or a 4900HS since AtenRa brought 35W TDP APUs to the table. But let's face it, 4800u configured for cTDP of 25W by the OEM is going to perform very close to a 35W TDP APU so . . . yeah.

What AMD would be doing for certain is wasting money on products that wouldn't be used by anyone. Simple as.

AMD has done that a lot. More than a lot. I think they have battered corporation syndrome by this point.

 

[AtenRa]

Nobody, because nobody buys a laptop solely for the full iGPU. For the laptop market, the CPU side iGPUs. Stop assuming your own needs would sell well.

iGPUs are irrelevant to OEMs. Completely and utterly irrelevant. They don't care if you would prefer a 6c6t APU with a full iGPU, they'll sell you the 4800U regardless with the 4600U as the cut down version anyway. Why? Because that's where the biggest margins lie.

And you don't understand OEMs if you think a better iGPU is enough to dissuade them from slapping anemic dGPUs to their solid iGPU products. There are laptops with MX130s (or was it MX230s, I forget now) put alongside a 1065G7.

What AMD would be doing for certain is wasting money on products that wouldn't be used by anyone. Simple as.

And yet you believe that the Full iGPU in the 4800U is the reason that SKU will give higher margins.
The reason 4800U will give higher margins is its 8Cores 16Threads CPU , so even if 4800U would come with only a 3CU iGPU it would still give higher margins because of its 8C 16T CPU.


And as you said OEMs will opt for higher margins, how on earth they will get higher margins when BOM will increase using a dGPU instead of the APU alone ??
Needles to point out that the vast majority of laptops sold are only using iGPUs.

 

[uzzi38]

And yet you believe that the Full iGPU in the 4800U is the reason that SKU will give higher margins.
The reason 4800U will give higher margins is its 8Cores 16Threads CPU , so even if 4800U would come with only a 3CU iGPU it would still give higher margins because of its 8C 16T CPU.

No, because it's the top end product. Top end product meaning best in every way. Best per core performance, best in terms of core count, best in terms of binning, best in iGPU performance.

What you're suggesting would lower that difference between the best and the midrange skus. No OEM with the slightest modicrum of common sense would ever make their top end product look less worth it compared to their mid-tier product by upgrading the mid-tier product. The SKU your suggest would always be ignored in favour of the 4600U/4600H in their current formats.

And as you said OEMs will opt for higher margins, how on earth they will get higher margins when BOM will increase using a dGPU instead of the APU alone ??
Needles to point out that the vast majority of laptops sold are only using iGPUs.

It's not about BOM in those cases. The dGPU is added because iGPU performance doesn't sell laptops. Having a dGPU does. Unfortunately, the majority of the market prefers dGPUs to iGPUs of equal power, because they don't think iGPUs can have the same power as dGPUs.

IT's like how people buy a 9600K because the 9900K is the best at gaming. That same logic applies here too. IT's not about increasing margins on those devices, its about selling more of them.

 

[AtenRa]

Why in God's name would you sell a 35W TDP APU like that? Then you're cannibalizing sales of the 4900HS, which is even worse than killing sales of the 4800u. Okay, go ahead and go back to my comments where I mentioned the 4800u and sub in 4900HS.

Again, 4600HG would be a 6Core APU that will not compete and will not cannibalize an 8Core APU (4900HS) simple because they have the same iGPU.

What you are saying is like why AMD did release the R5 3600 and the R7 3700X when they could only release the 8Core 16Threads R7 3700X

Its called segmentation, a 6Core apu with full iGPU will never cannibalize a 8Core apu with full iGPU just because both have the same iGPU.

 

[RetroZombie]

AtenRa all pretty, just cant see how it would be priced?
4 core/8 thread full igp same price as 6 core/6 thread with cut down igp?

Amd analyzed all and have done the proper calculations.
I only hope we see many models without dgpus, i prefer more ram and more storage over dgpu.

 

[neblogai]

One of the problems is, that OEMs sell the names/specs (like 'i7', '512GB', 'MX150', '16mm thin'), not performance. So for most users 4600G and 4600GH and even 4600U at 10W would seem about the same, because boost clocks are similar, and thread count is the same. Laptop market is a 'lemon market'. So for AMD to have sales of 4600HG, they would have to differentiate it, maybe by creating a virtual, say, 'GH330' GPU and special sticker for a laptop, and then certifying the laptop, to make sure it actually outperforms the MX330. So that there is a branding to sell, with guaranteed level of performance- and OEMs could sell the 'GH330' without actually putting anything into the laptop. Otherwise- it is a lemon market, and the cheapest design under the same '4600' brand/specs wins, no matter if performance is ruined, or lasts only during the boost.

 

[DrMrLordX]

And yet you believe that the Full iGPU in the 4800U is the reason that SKU will give higher margins.

It provides higher margins because AMD charges more for it.

The reason 4800U will give higher margins is its 8Cores 16Threads CPU

No, that's just AMD's excuse for charging more for it. If they could get away with charging the OEM the same amount for a 6c/12t chip with 8CU they would. OEM's know enough not to go down that road. BUT the OEM could easily turn around and sell a laptop with a 6c/12t APU for the same amount they would sell a 8c/16t APU (or 95-97% as much) and get away with it because consumers often don't know better. Just put the same components in there otherwise, trim BoM a bit with the lower-end 6c chip, and profit.

And as you said OEMs will opt for higher margins, how on earth they will get higher margins when BOM will increase using a dGPU instead of the APU alone ??

They redirect consumers to a higher-priced model with the dGPU, and charge more for the dGPU than it costs them to integrate it. They also get to cheap out on cooling the APU since they get to shift heat away from it (iGPU isn't in use except in rare cases).

Needles to point out that the vast majority of laptops sold are only using iGPUs.

Those are generally downmarket products. AMD doesn't want to sell an 8CU APU to the downmarket. They also don't want a downmarket APU polluting their upmarket products (which makes them risk selling a lower-margin 6c APU when they could be selling an 8c APU instead at higher price/higher margin). Remember, all the APUs come from the same dice.

Is that sinking in yet?

Again, 4600HG would be a 6Core APU that will not compete and will not cannibalize an 8Core APU (4900HS) simple because they have the same iGPU.

They will if the OEM starts buying up only 6c chips and stops buying the 4900HS. Do you really think consumers would notice? Also, OEMs would just stick the 6c/12t 8CU chip with a dGPU anyway . . . no way they're moving it to the downmarket.

What you are saying is like why AMD did release the R5 3600 and the R7 3700X when they could only release the 8Core 16Threads R7 3700X

AMD is working against different forces in socket AM4. Generally consumers in that market are better-informed and less likely to be in the thrall of sleazy system integrators. There ARE going to be a lot of misconfigured systems with 3600 CPUs that could use a 3700x instead (or vice versa), but any overflow AMD has from stupid OEM games can be pushed into the DiY market or to smaller OEMs that allow system configurations for the consumer (barebones or otherwise). In the laptop market, AMD is completely at the mercy of OEMs. You know this and you've seen them do it before.

Its called segmentation

Segmentation works when you're in control of the product stack from front to back. Intel can dictate terms to OEMs. AMD can't.

 

[RetroZombie]

Even intel never released 'low end' cpus with their iris plus/pro igp.

I only remember some desktop i3 with a beefier igp, the i3-3220 vs i3-3225,
not sure how successfully those where.

 

[eek2121]

I'm pretty sure we won't see a fat GPU core on an APU. I'm going to go further and say that the 4xxx APU series will be launched with the 4xxx "Vermeer" desktop parts. The APUs will cover the low end, while Zen 3 will cover the high end.

 

[AtenRa]

Even intel never released 'low end' cpus with their iris plus/pro igp.

I only remember some desktop i3 with a beefier igp, the i3-3220 vs i3-3225,
not sure how successfully those where.

Q1 2017
Core i3 7167U - 2C 4T with Iris Plus 650 at 28W TDP - 14nm
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...ore-i3-7167u-processor-3m-cache-2-80-ghz.html

Q2 2018
Core i3 8109U - 2C 4T with Iris Plus 655 at 28W TDP - 14nm

Intel® Core™ i3-8109U Processor (4M Cache, up to 3.60 GHz) Product Specifications

Intel® Core™ i3-8109U Processor (4M Cache, up to 3.60 GHz) quick reference guide including specifications, features, pricing, compatibility, design documentation, ordering codes, spec codes and more.

ark.intel.com

Q3 2019
Core i3 1000G4 - 2C 4T with Iris Plus at 9W TDP - 10nm

Intel® Core™ i3-1000G4 Processor (4M Cache, up to 3.20 GHz) Product Specifications

Intel® Core™ i3-1000G4 Processor (4M Cache, up to 3.20 GHz) quick reference guide including specifications, features, pricing, compatibility, design documentation, ordering codes, spec codes and more.

ark.intel.com

The majority of them were used in Intel NUCs.

But we are not talking about this here, we are just debating for AMD to release a lower SKU with current full iGPU that is the same as the one found in R7 4800/4900.
The iGPU is already in the same die, nobody is talking about a larger die for a a larger iGPU like the Iris Plus/Pro.

 

[DrMrLordX]

we are just debating for AMD to release a lower SKU

The whole thread is about whether or not we want to see them release such a thing. Debate was strictly optional. Why are people so upset that anyone would have the temerity to just say, "no"? As if any of the discussion here affects AMD's product lineup?

Personally I wouldn't get a laptop without a dGPU anyway. Too expensive? I'll save my pennies until I could afford it and just slow down my pace of upgrades. Looking at the Asus unit with a 4900HS, it looks to me like Renoir can be amazing even when paired with a seemingly-extraneous dGPU. Personally I'd prefer a Radeon Mobility product but whatever. I'm definitely not in the market for a lappie with only 8CUs.

 

[EliteRetard]

Why are people so upset that anyone would have the temerity to just say, "no"?
*snip*

Because you didn't just say no. You took every opportunity to fight the idea like it was horrendously bad.

Trying to confuse people and using strawman arguments like these:

"OEMs absolutely will not allow it! AMD can't possibly dictate terms!"
- Special HS CPU's exist with specific requirements from AMD, Asus G14 exists

"Absolutely nobody is interested, it has no merit!"
- 64% of respondents so far indicate that they are interested.

"Only the 4800 and 4900 should exist, everything else is low profit and cannibalizes sales!"
- Ha! This is just a stupid thing to say, it's not even a valid argument

Here's one more way I can try to make it clear, below I'll list out the general price ranges for the various laptops by CPU.
Personally I don't think there needs to be full IGP versions of the U series (it's redundant), but I am listing them here anyway.
My thinking is the U and H always overlapped in price, pick U series for low power/performance and H/HS/HG series for high performance.

$400 4300U Highly unlikely that these low priced options will be paired with a dGPU, why cripple the IGP?
$500 4500U I guess I can understand it under $500, these laptops are often undesirable for other reasons too.
$600 4600HG full IGP only . . . or 4600UG full IGP only
$700 4600H+dGPU . . . . . . . . . or 4600U+dGPU
$800 4800HG full IGP only . . . or 4700UG full IGP only
$1000 4800H+dGPU . . . . . . . . or 4700U+dGPU
$1200 4900H full IGP only . . . or 4800U full IGP only
$1400 4900H+dGPU . . . . . . . . or 4800U+dGPU
$1600+ Top of the line gaming or workstation

The special HS series like the Asus G14 are premium options, they can exist outside a normal price tier.
In this case a well configured G14 happens to fall at $1450, a good value for what it is (based on reviews).
How could it hurt Asus or AMD to offer the exact same 4900HS laptop without the RTX2060 for a lower price?
If they simply reduce the cost by the actual BOM, they have increased the laptops profit when taken as a percentage.
The RTX2060 retails somewhere above $300, perhaps the BOM is $250...and a dGPU comes with other compromises too.

It's utterly laughable to say that a full IGP HG series would cannibalize sales of higher tier and dGPU laptops.
They are entirely different products, marketed to entirely different people, and at significantly different prices.
Like saying "Intel should stop selling all H series, they are superior to the U series at the same price (therefore cannibalizing sales!)"

If customers really can't figure it out, even the dumbest sales person can explain it simply and easily.
Are you a gamer? Here's dGPU options. Do you need more than 8-10hrs unplugged? Here's U series. Otherwise here's the fastest options (HG).

Edit:
Right now there is no "HG" option. It's just gamer or low performance. Can people not see the massive market opportunity between those?
AMD is now perfectly poised to completely take that market, if they can be made to see how many people would be served by offering it.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Because you didn't just say no. You took every opportunity to fight the idea like it was horrendously bad.

No, I didn't. There are other reasons NOT to launch this SKU. I gave the main reasons.

And those are good reasons, too.

So sorry I used logic and reasoning. Next time I'll just say "no" without backing up anything to make sure not to hurt anyone's feelings. Actually no, I won't. Forget that. I'll just keep hurting people's feelings. Every time someone starts a "why doesn't <insertvendorhere> launch an SKU I'd really like" thread, if there are good reasons why NOT to do so, someone should come in and say quite matter-of-factly exactly why not. Remember the $250 3600x2?

Question - Rethinking AMD consumer CPU lineup in the situation of chiplet scarcity

If we look at the higher end of the consumer CPU lineup by AMD (beginning with Ryzen 3600), and the fact that AMD is unable to deliver a highly clocked 6+6 core CPU and effectively offers no high core count CPU at this point, and the fact that the high quality chiplets are better used in server...

forums.anandtech.com

(that was a real gem of a thread)

A hypothetical 4600HG isn't that idiotic, but it's the same basic idea. Someone thinks they know better than AMD or Intel or . . . somebody, and wants to forum warrior their way to victory. Especially AFTER the entire product lineup has been announced.

 

[AtenRa]

The big difference here is that the OP was talking from a consumer perspective and what he/she would like to have on a laptop with an APU and asking about other users thoughts on the matter. Also the vote is addressed to the users and if THEY would like to see a APU such as the 4600HG with a full iGPU.
But some people give their thoughts on what the OEMs and AMD should/want and if 4600HG will cannibalize or not other SKUs and about higher margins. Well, that has nothing to do with the voting in this topic guys. Its either you like to see a 4600HG for what it will bring to the consumer or you dont, not if OEMs will use this SKU in laptops or if AMD will make less money from it.

 

[EliteRetard]

I'm just about to take a nap so I won't make a full response right now.

Nobody here said they knew better than AMD or Intel.

I simply asked if anybody else would be interested in a hypothetical product, one that could very easily exist (basically already does).
The entire point was to gather information and get a feel for how popular an idea it might be.

I don't have access to information from AMD or Intel. I don't know who they polled, or what the questions were.
I saw an obvious (to me) hole in the market, realized there was a perfect product to fill it, and then decided to ask others.

If a large number and percentage were positive to it, perhaps it's worth looking further into. No person or company is perfect.
Just like New Coke, they asked everyone if it was preferred to Pepsi and never thought to ask if it was preferred to Original Coke.
They found out quick what a huge mistake that was. Sometimes chasing the competition isn't all you need, but asking the right questions.

 

[DrMrLordX]

But some people give their thoughts on what the OEMs and AMD should/want and if 4600HG will cannibalize or not other SKUs and about higher margins. Well, that has nothing to do with the voting in this topic guys.

It does, actually. AMD making stupid decisions cost them hundreds of millions in lost revenues, which in turn gave us a decade of products ranging from "okay" to "abysmal failure". Pardon me if, as a consumer, I don't want them screwing up again. A 8CU midrange APU wouldn't cause that kind of damage, but repeated mistakes along that line would. If they're going to do some things right, then they may as well do everything right.

And to reiterate, as a consumer, the astounding performance and battery life of Asus' 4900HS laptop shows me that maybe iGPUs are just a bad idea for laptops anyway. AMD should have seriously considered shaving off some or all of the iGPU instead of trying to put 8CUs on their top-end mobile APUs. They're already down from 11CUs to 8. Anyone still wondering why? AMD isn't pushing HSA anymore. Instead they're pushing CCIX interconnects in the server space to reduce latency/increase coherency between PCIe-connected devices and CPUs.