To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
For the low-performance market, I believe AMD chips also perform worse on the power efficiency front, though I haven't checked in-depth benchmarking tests in a while. Again, might explain why almost no middle-end to high-end notebook uses their stuff.
It seems to me that you're forgetting one thing: anyone who really needs lots of GPU power won't be satisfied with the low-end stuff that gets integrated in CPUs, whether it's done by Intel or AMD.
In the dedicated GPU area, AMD are competing with NVidia, not Intel, and it's a different battle altogether.
The AMD APU line that makes up their mid to bottom end lineup are actually very competitive with performance per watt due to having rolled the GPU and northbridge chips into the CPU, so the rated power draw for those chips has to take that into account.
As for those that need more oomph, take a look at the new stuff stating to filter out now, like the MSI GX60 laptop. They are taking AMD's fastest mobile APU and pairing it up with AMD's fastest mobile dedicated GPU, it's getting you plenty of CPU power for anything you might be CPU bound in as well as giving you a ton of GPU performance when you need it as well as still being able to have good battery life as t can turn off the HD7970m and just use the APU. On the flip side when you need that performance the APU's GPU can be used for GPGPU physics in the same way that Nvidia uses PhysX in games or as just another GPGPU in your GPGPU capable software.
More AMD laptops are just now filtering to the market as well, Everything kind of died off with AMD launching new chips either due to chip shortages, companies holding off on orders till the new chip dropped and whatnot. But now that the new stuff is starting to hit the shelves it should be picking up again from the low end tablet and netbooks with the Z-60 to the mid range laptops with the A10-4600m to the upper mid range desktops with the FX-3850.
What Kivada says (Brazos does fine in netbooks), plus this isn't about those "who really needs lots of GPU power" - in plenty of usage scenarios it's more about "good enough" while keeping costs down; AMD offering generally nice bang-per-buck.
For example, once that video editing app offers realtime performance, you don't really need greater performance that much. It's also nice to be able to comfortably play more games on your inexpensive AMD laptop, than on an inexpensive Intel one.





Member since:
2005-07-06
When it comes to general usage, what does "late on the CPU front for a while now" even mean? Because CPUs have been more than powerful enough, in such usage, for a while now.
There are only really two home PC areas which can be still starved for power - gaming and video editing. In both, the GPU kinda matters more; so in both, AMD is the one with an edge, thanks to more capable integrated GPUs.