Quote from: ilikegames on January 19, 2021, 14:18:25The reality is only the GTX line makes sense when it comes to productivity/gaming and the MX line albeit, not terrible but certainly doesn't give the consumer the most bang for its buck.

You forgot about the Quadro for the professional side, but i agree.

That being said, Quadro has some garbage too. like the M1200 which i'm currently borrowing while waiting for a new CAD system.
This thing is barely any faster than a gt950 on a good day. Usually it's similar to a 940m from my testing. The only difference is that certain software work better with Quadro's

Quote from: Sorin on January 11, 2021, 19:59:28
I don't get it. Why put an underpowered GPU to a laptop, when a well powered  Xe ipgu can outperform it with a GT1050 like performance (Witcher 3 medium settings in Schenker Vision/Intel NUC M15 review). Oh i see ...for the hefty price tag.

yeah and also to market, it has a "dedicated gpu". The uneducated buyer will see this and think to himself/herself, "Wow, a GPU! I must BUY this" The reality is only the GTX line makes sense when it comes to productivity/gaming and the MX line albeit, not terrible but certainly doesn't give the consumer the most bang for its buck.

Honestly this is a good progress by Nvidia. It seems like that they are making some dang upliftment in the lower segment of the laptop market. I am dubious about the "midrange" term for an MX GPU but nonetheless, it is clearly faster than a desktop GT 1030. Although I have to say, it would have been much better if they had released this product 2 years prior as this kind performance is only applicable if the integrated solution isn't powerful enough. Good work AMD & Intel, keep up the competition! I love being a customer if this continues.

An indicator in the reviews' graphics under specifications tab, that shows which version of dGPUs and TGP a laptop is using would be very helpful in the future reviews.

Though it's slightly amusing to see a 1650 run fine at such a low TGP (probably the lowest I've seen from a discrete GPU), I wouldn't call this midrange at all. The current midrange should be the 1660-1660Ti. If it starts with "MX", it's not meant to be midrange.

I don't get it. Why put an underpowered GPU to a laptop, when a well powered  Xe ipgu can outperform it with a GT1050 like performance (Witcher 3 medium settings in Schenker Vision/Intel NUC M15 review). Oh i see ...for the hefty price tag.