Holy pile of confusion bad dude.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse... Even experienced people have trouble with the CPU line they cr@p out each year, besides the basics like 2500K, 2600K etc. Try looking at ALL models including the mobile segment, naming scheme fun! 😀

Need to push the CPU integrated graphics more... Need to have the latest 200$ CPU to be as graphically powerful as the latest x60 nvidia or x70 amd card. PC`s need to get MUCH smaller.

:wanker: Talk about a pipe dream. So you expect them to put a graphics chip as powerful as a GTX 960 ($200) in a $200 CPU? So you're basically asking for $400 worth of power and size, for $200. Yeah okay lol, try again in 10 years...

What Intel needs to do is use the full gpu core for the whole mobil cpu line since it would even bottle neck an i3 then we would have an interesting mobile market.

Why can't they make discrete GPU with 4-6 times more execution units in it?

Why can't they make discrete GPU with 4-6 times more execution units in it?

Mostly size constraint. Haswell dedicates 174mm^2 to the GPU. Simply multiplying this by four gives you a GPU chip 100mm^2 larger than the 980Ti. 600mm2 is the limit on reticle size. Also while Intel's architecture is decent at shader performance, it's terrible at everything else. Pixel/Texel/Geometry. It's worse at all these things then Nvidia's offerings at the same level. So it wouldn't be as simple as just multiplying the slices, they'd need to redesign some stuff too in order to be competitive. It may happen in the future, but as of now they aren't even close to competing with the other companies. Plus Nvidia owns a huge swath of patents on discreet graphics processing. It wouldn't surprise me if that also plays a role on Intel moving into that market.

What Intel needs to do as far as their IGPU goes is ditch the HD series and putting out their Iris Pro IGPUs.

Mostly size constraint. Haswell dedicates 174mm^2 to the GPU. Simply multiplying this by four gives you a GPU chip 100mm^2 larger than the 980Ti. 600mm2 is the limit on reticle size. Also while Intel's architecture is decent at shader performance, it's terrible at everything else. Pixel/Texel/Geometry. It's worse at all these things then Nvidia's offerings at the same level. So it wouldn't be as simple as just multiplying the slices, they'd need to redesign some stuff too in order to be competitive. It may happen in the future, but as of now they aren't even close to competing with the other companies. Plus Nvidia owns a huge swath of patents on discreet graphics processing. It wouldn't surprise me if that also plays a role on Intel moving into that market.

Does die size really matter on discrete PCIE video card? Haswell Iris Pro 5200 offers 830 GFLOPS having 28W TDP and 22nm tech process. It would be 3300 GFLOPS with TDP less than GTX 960. May be it won't beat GTX 970 in real games, but what about GTX 960? In real life Iris Pro 5200 provides higher fps than 930M. And then there is 14nm and GT4e. And isn't Intel has crosslicensing agreement with AMD? Or is it CPU-related only?