1.Yes this is quite an achievement from Intel since they are not a graphics company. This shows they are more serious about providing an actually useful iGPU. 2. These are not for desktops so yes they would be good to have in laptops with an Intel chip. Not the AMD g series. It's funny people rave over those cheapy chips. 3. I hope Intel keeps going forward with making better gpus. AMD needs some competition on the low end GPU spot. AMD fanboys usually cry because of lack of competition. Well here it is.
Do you guys have an UHD version of C940? I'm intressed about Lenovos promise of 9,5 hours of battery time on uhd model, if it's really Athena qualified laptop then it should hit that result at 250nits of brightness.. That would roughly mean 4-5hours at 500nits, and that would be impressive.
Excuse me... Are we comparing these two? Vega11 igpu released like 2 years ago with ryzen5. Please tell me the price difrence. If igpu is your thing just buy 2400g....
too little too late, so not quite groundbreaking performance. keep in mind that vega igpus are bottlenecked by ddr4 2400 mhz memory support, while intel used lpddr4x, which is a a bit over 50% faster! Imagine that RAM on a ryzen CPU.
Also, how about the prices? I doubt these i7s with iris pro GPUs will cost as much as a ryzen 7. and the zen 2 mobile CPUs are on the way. good job intel, but not good enough :)
Intel has had Iris graphics options before and it was offered in like 5 laptops due to a high price, I presume.
AMD Ryzen 5/7 CPU's come with Vega 8/10 as standard and I highly doubt the same goes for Iris, so the article should reflect that and not give an impression that this is the new standard.