Nvidia GeForce MX330 and MX350 in review: Known architecture - New name

[Redaktion]

Nvidia is retiring the GeForce MX230 and MX250, replacing them with slightly faster models. We've taken a closer look at the two new entry-level GPUs, and in this review, you'll learn about their expected performance.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Nvidia-GeForce-MX330-and-MX350-in-review-Known-architecture-New-name.456962.0.html

[A]

Why bother putting these GPUs into laptops when you can just use an APU with faster integrated graphics? These decisions boggles my mind.

[WiredBrain]

Why bother putting these GPUs into laptops when you can just use an APU with faster integrated graphics? These decisions boggles my mind.

I surmise it has to do with contractual agreements the manufacturers have/had with nvidia to use their gpus for how ever long the contract is and for how many units to be purchased and in what products they are to be used in.
AMD had no real products to compete with Nvidia for a very long time so manufacturers saw Nvidia as a staple for the long term.
Unless AMD can offer better agreements with manufacturers (if contractual agreements manufacturers have with Nvidia don't prohibit the use of competitors' products in specific models etc.), we'll be seeing mostly Nvidia gpus in all product variations manufacturers have to offer.
The same surmise goes for Intel cpu's vs AMD even though AMD has the better product/cost.

[mcjw]

since when does notebookcheck use euphemisms? "Old Architecture, New Name" ("Old", not "Known". There, fixed it for you.)

[william blake]

this is what happens if no competition from amd.
nvidia made their entry level dgpu just slightly faster than any 2020 igpu, to save the sales.

[william blake]

Why bother putting these GPUs into laptops when you can just use an APU with faster integrated graphics? These decisions boggles my mind.

i hear lisa su voice from 2017 in my head.
it didn't work, this marketing failed hard.

[jeremy]

Why bother putting these GPUs into laptops when you can just use an APU with faster integrated graphics? These decisions boggles my mind.

I surmise it has to do with contractual agreements the manufacturers have/had with nvidia to use their gpus for how ever long the contract is and for how many units to be purchased and in what products they are to be used in.
AMD had no real products to compete with Nvidia for a very long time so manufacturers saw Nvidia as a staple for the long term.
Unless AMD can offer better agreements with manufacturers (if contractual agreements manufacturers have with Nvidia don't prohibit the use of competitors' products in specific models etc.), we'll be seeing mostly Nvidia gpus in all product variations manufacturers have to offer.
The same surmise goes for Intel cpu's vs AMD even though AMD has the better product/cost.

Outside of APUs, AMD's low end dGPU offerings are pretty much junk. Much more power consumption for no greater performance. Sometimes, worse performance than Intel IGP, inside of a chassis that can easily cool an AMD APU (Thinkpad E series comes to mind... Lenovo didn't cheap out on the heatsink, either. E485 is great with an APU. E480 with Intel + AMD dGPU is basically junk. Better to have E480 with Intel only).

In terms of AMD APU laptops, they are fine. Battery life concerns dogged them for the first two APU generations, but this upcoming 3rd APU gen (AMD's terminology for the 4000 series APUs) should further narrow the gap with Intel or take the lead.

[John Doe]

The MX350 (25W) should have been compared with 1050 Max-Q (35-40W) rather than the regular one (70W). A baffling choice..

[Ivan Hong]

Great.... now we got MX350, GTX 1050 3GB, GTX 1050 3GB Max-Q, GTX 1050 2GB, GTX 1050 2GB Max-Q, GTX 1050 4GB, GTX 1050 4GB Max-Q.

Don't tell me we will also get a MX350 max-Q..... it is getting ridiculous at this point.

[Honza]

Why bother putting these GPUs into laptops when you can just use an APU with faster integrated graphics? These decisions boggles my mind.

Huh? Intel's G7 has 27 points and Vega 10 ~40 points in the perf rating compared to 50 or 60 for these new MXs. They are quite a bit better

[xpclient]

One gotcha: No nvenc on these MX graphics. Better to go for Intel iGPU, every one of those has Intel QuickSync or AMD Vega GPU, every one of those has Video Coding Engine/Video Core Next.

[S.Yu]

The power figures are again perplexing, it seems from the table that to boost 25 more MHz with 25% more TUs turned on, and double the memory bandwidth, the 1050 consumes 300% the power of the MX350.

[JohnMac]

The power figures are again perplexing, it seems from the table that to boost 25 more MHz with 25% more TUs turned on, and double the memory bandwidth, the 1050 consumes 300% the power of the MX350.

At such low power consumption 300% isn't actually that much in absolute terms.

GDDR5 and controllers use a significant amount of power, and actual clocks are likely very different. Eg a 10510u with 4.9ghz boost isn't going to come close to a 7700k with similar advertised boost clocks.

[Jesse]

What is perplexing is why do people buy this crap?   Is it just a checkbox item to help market a laptop to rubes?

I can't wait for AMD to take over the space with better CPUs and GPUs.

[william blake]

What is perplexing is why do people buy this crap?   Is it just a checkbox item to help market a laptop to rubes?

~30%~330% faster than igpu for 50-70 usd. great deal.