680M will likely outperform MX570 in Radeon driver optimized games but vice versa for productivity apps like CAD and Adobe most of which prefer Nvidia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znIEHZjsf18

Either way, it makes more sense for a person to upgrade to a 14-inch RTX 3050 Max-Q laptop typically coming from an older iGPU ultrabook.

Quote from: Dorby on May 04, 2022, 08:54:35
Because it fills the gap between iGPU and RTX graphics. Intel Iris XE 96EU and AMD Radeon 680M will fall behind MX570 in the majority of productivity apps that properly use GPU acceleration and other Nvidia unique features.

There is also the 16 series. How much difference do you expect between MX570 and 680M? Personally, I like CUDA.

Quote from: RinzImpulse on May 03, 2022, 14:14:37
Is there any point to get entry level GPU on cheap + thin and light laptops anymore other than cuda core + added heat? Those MX series doesn't even have hardware encoder/decoder, so why bother?

Because it fills the gap between iGPU and RTX graphics. Intel Iris XE 96EU and AMD Radeon 680M will fall behind MX570 in the majority of productivity apps that properly use GPU acceleration and other Nvidia unique features.

Reality is, there are 1or 2 laptops with MX570 and 3-4 laptops above $1500 with 6800U. Whereas the Irix XE is available on 100 different laptops at all price points.

No point for Nvidia and AMD to make expensive entry-level GPUs when they aren't available on decent hardware, or not available at all for most regions around the world.

Not surprised to see AMD fanboys whining like they always do whenever something is not about their favorite brand.

They are getting on the levels of Apple fanboys, with the difference being that at least Apple fanboys get their products really fast and dont have to pray for miracles to happen to get a solid product for their tastes.

The Intel fanboy puts Iris on the title, instead of the strongest RDNA. Typical.

Quote from: Erik on May 03, 2022, 14:06:23
Because AMD thin laptops are already rarely coupled with Nvidia's MX series?

I think so as well. Exactly because Intel's iGPU was so weak, there was space for cheap and relatively weak dGPUs. Ryzen had more powerful iGPU that left less space for such configurations (the cost of a dGPU remained the same but the benefit was smaller). Improvements in AMD's camp primarily serve to eliminate frustrations stemming from the lack of such configurations. And Intel's biggest weakness is the lack of optimization in games. AMD benefits from a GPU heritage. They can have the raw computing power but that doesn't mean they get the performance in applications.

Is there any point to get entry level GPU on cheap + thin and light laptops anymore other than cuda core + added heat? Those MX series doesn't even have hardware encoder/decoder, so why bother?

Quote from: Hossam Hassan on May 03, 2022, 09:39:01
Why you didn't mention the new ryzen 7 6800u?

Because AMD thin laptops are already rarely coupled with Nvidia's MX series?

Quote from: lhl on May 03, 2022, 11:09:49
[...] why not mention that the new Radeon 680M (the RDNA2 iGPU on the latest Ryzen 6000 chips), according to your own testing on NotebookCheck seems to beat the pants off both the MX450 and Iris Xe 96EU in both synthetics and gaming benchmarks?

Yes indeed. Saw the intro text and came here to mention the same thing. There are videos on YouTube comparing the two GPUs basically painting the same picture: nVidia MX GPUs are not going to be obsolete - they are obsolete RIGHT NOW.

It sucks to acknowledge because NBC is/was(?) a good onestop shop for hardware news, but this isn't really good reporting.

If this is a sponsored/paid placement for Intel don't you need to say so? If not, why not mention that the new Radeon 680M (the RDNA2 iGPU on the latest Ryzen 6000 chips), according to your own testing on NotebookCheck seems to beat the pants off both the MX450 and Iris Xe 96EU in both synthetics and gaming benchmarks?

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA GeForce MX450 → 100% n=14
Average Benchmarks AMD Radeon 680M → 175% n=14
Average Benchmarks Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs → 107% n=14

Average Gaming NVIDIA GeForce MX450 → 100%
Average Gaming AMD Radeon 680M → 200%
Average Gaming Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs → 87%

I can't post links, so see GeForce-MX450-vs-Radeon-680M-vs-Iris-Xe-G7-96EUs_10349_11124_10364.247598.0.html

Because you can't buy one yet and won't be able to until another 6 months at the very least?

By the time they are actually widely available, you'll be able to get mx450 laptops for $600 or less. Compared to > $1200 + ryzen 6000 APU's.

I am interested in them aswell. But let's not get carried away and delusional...

Why you didn't mention the new ryzen 7 6800u?
AMD claim that its integrated graphics is better than Nvidia mx450