AMD's integrated GPUs have been getting really good lately. I'm impressed at what they are capable of with gaming handhelds and it only makes sense to put the same extra GPU power into desktop APUs. This hopefully will lead to true gaming laptops that don't require power hungry discrete GPUs and workarounds/render offloading for hybrid graphics. That said, to truly be a gaming laptop replacement I want to see a solid 60fps minimum at at least 1080p, but the fact that we're seeing numbers close to this is impressive nonetheless.

I was sold on AMD once I got my Steamdeck.

I hope red and blue both find success in this segment. Ideally the strengthened APU share of the market exerts pressure on publishers to properly optimize their games instead of cynically offloading the compute cost onto players.

Now, if they stick one in a framework laptop, I’ll be a few thousand dollars poorer.

Common W for AMD

Only downside if integrated graphics becomes a thing is that you can’t upgrade if the next gen needs a different motherboard. Pretty easy to swap from a 2080 to a 3080.

Oh, oh ok I thought one of the new Threadrippers is so powerful that the CPU can do all those graphics in Software.

For people like me who game once a month, and mostly stupid little game, this is great news. I bet many people could use that, it would reduce demand for graphic card and allow those who want them to buy cheaper.

Mind you that it can get these frame rates at the low setting. While this is pretty damn impressive for a APU, it's still a very niche market type of APU at this point and I don't see this getting all that much traction myself.

A bit misleading, what is meant is that no dedicated GPU is being used. The integrated GPU in the APU is still a GPU. But yes, AMD's recent APUs are amazing for folks who don't want to spend too much to get a reasonable gaming setup.

$US330 for the top 8700G APU with12 RDNA 3 compute units (compare to 32 RDNA 3 CUs in the Radeon RX7600). And it only draws 88W at peak load and can be passively cooled (or overclocked).

$US230 for the 8600G with 8 RDNA 3 CUs. Falls about 10-15% short of 8700G performance in games, but a much bigger spread in CPU (Tom's Hardware benchmarks) so I'm pretty meh on that one.

Given the higher costs for AM5 boards and DDR5 RAM, you could spend about the same or $100-200 more than an 8700G build you could combine a cheaper CPU and better GPU and get way more bang for your buck. But I see the 8700G being an solid option for gamers on a budget, or parents wanting to build younger kids their first cheap-but-effective PC.

I also see this as a lazy mans solution to building small form factor mini-ITX Home Theatre PCs that run silent and don't need a separate GPU to receive 4K live streams. I'm exactly in this boat right now where I literally don't wanna fiddle with cramming a GPU into some tiny box, but also don't want some piece of crap iGPU in case I use the HTPC for some light gaming from time to time.

That's pretty damn impressive. AMD is changing the game!

It's about the same performance as a 1050ti, which is a 2016 gpu. It's still very much behind entry level discrete gpus like Rx 6600.

Might make sense for a laptop or mini pc, but dont really see the point for desktop considering the price.

The playstation 5 also does this.

I wonder how well it does AI workloads.

So will this be a HTPC king? Kind of skimped on the temps in the article. I assume HWU goes over it and will watch it soon.