12-Watt GeForce MX450 beats the 25-Watt GeForce-MX350 - Testing the Asus ZenBook 14 UX435EG

[Redaktion]

Asus uses the most current technology in the ZenBook 14: A Tiger Lake processor, GeForce MX450 graphics core, 16 GB of working memory (quad-channel mode), and Thunderbolt 4. A 63-Wh battery ensures a good battery life.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/12-Watt-GeForce-MX450-beats-the-25-Watt-GeForce-MX350-Testing-the-Asus-ZenBook-14-UX435EG.514186.0.html

[Sorin]

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.

[S.Yu]

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.

[Dorby]

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.

[ilikegames]

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.

[ilikegames]

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.

[DragonFox]

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.

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