Exactly. That is what I mean. It would not surprise me at all if they have decided to neglect desktop APUs in this generation due to increased demand from OEMs. It is the same die. Demand for (and sales of) their desktop APUs have been tepid since they released Raven Ridge. The sales are probably good by Kaveri/Godavari standards, but today . . . ? No. And that is probably why we haven't seen a 4400G or . . . whatever they might call AM4 Renoir.
Desktop APUs have always arrived significantly later than mobile APUs. 3000-series mobile APUs were launched at CES and started arriving in laptops in April-May or so. Desktop APUs hit the market in August or later. Given the CES launch of 4000-series mobile APUs and their arrival on the market in March, we're likely looking at a similar timeframe for 4000-series desktop APUs. Nothing at all unusual about that, and nothing indicating "neglect[ing] desktop APUs in this generation".
@Topweasel
Also, OEMs are not afraid to use laptop hardware in a desktop form factor if the price and performance are right. They don't need socket AM4 unless it offers some product advantage, like better cooling; lower prices; or better SKUs for their customer. Lots of desktop AiO solutions have mobile hardware in them. Well some of them do.
If AMD is able to sell all their Renoir dice in mobile form factor at attractive margins, they aren't going to want to repackage as many of them as 4000-series desktop APUs.
It's true that OEMs aren't afraid of that, but it's more expensive (having to solder the APU to the board runs the risk of scrapping whole boards if the APU is defective) so they avoid it unless it is for some application where they find it makes more sense (such as SFF systems where they want the direct-die cooling). Using socket AM4 allows them to re-use motherboard designs, which saves money, and allows for further scaling of the same product line should they want to.
Tl;dr: there is zero indication that there won't be a Renoir AM4 desktop APU series.
@Shivansps
It is inaccurate to assume that continuing to use Vega would be a decision borne of "no demand for powerful iGPUs". AMD is going to continue to update Vega as a part of CDNA. The big question is whether or not updated CDNA will find it in any display-capable hardware. RDNA is allegeldy not compute-friendly, so I would not expect to find it in workstation cards and other professional dGPUs intended for display duty (which do exist, and have for some time). We already know Renoir has Vega and AMD has decided on Vega for mobile Renoir, so logically desktop Renoir - if/when it appears - will also be a Vega product. Whatever happens on the desktop will be an extension of whatever it is AMD decides is important for mobile - not for desktop. Desktop APUs are also-rans.
I find it rather absurd to think CDNA - a datacenter compute centric spin-off of GCN - will find its way into APUs of all things. Even for a workstation APU the iGPU won't be big enough to deliver meaningful compute to the extent that a workstation needing GPU compute can skip the dGPU. And RDNA delivers perfectly acceptable compute performance, even if it isn't quite at GCN (or CDNA) levels per CU. And AMD has stated quite unequivocally that GCN is dead and that RDNA is their "GPU architecture for the next decade" - note the singular form of "architecture", indicating that no others will be carried forward and that CDNA is a compute accelerator architecture rather than a GPU architecture. Given that the main focus for APUs is integrated
graphics for mobile and low-power applications (including Ryzen embedded and EPYC embedded) there is zero reason to think CDNA will be tapped for such a job - that's not what it's designed for. And GCN was warmed over for Renoir simply because the RDNA design wasn't ready for porting into the APU design when they needed it in the Renoir design cycle - 1 - 1 1/2 year (if not more) before launch, i.e. mid 2018 or earlier (a full year before the first RDNA dGPUs). Next gen APUs will 99% sure use RDNA, if for no other reasons than Intel finally becoming competitive on iGPU performance (but likely also to simplify future driver development).
Facebook
Twitter