Intel's new G-series processors includes AMD Radeon RX Vega M onboard graphics

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 8
Intel's latest processor launch is a collaboration with long-time rival AMD, with the two chip firms working together to create a pair of 8th generation Core processors that are equipped with Radeon RX Vega M graphics, with the onboard AMD GPU potentially helping with the creation of more powerful notebooks or small form-factor computers like the Mac mini that do not require a dedicated GPU.




The pair of G-series chip ranges each consist of an eight-generation Intel Core processor alongside a custom Radeon RX Vega M GPU, connected together with eight PCI Express Gen 3 lanes. Next to the GPU is 4 gigabytes of High Bandwidth Memory Gen 2 (HBM2), which is connected to the GPU via Intel's Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge (EMIB) technology.

The lower-specification model will use a Radeon RX Vega M GL GPU with base and boosted clock speeds of 931 and 1,011 megahertz respectively, and 20 compute units. Paired a quad-core Intel Core processor clocked at up to 4.1 gigahertz with up to 8 megabytes of cache, the entire package will have a thermal design point (TDP) of 65 Watts, making it highly suitable for mobile systems.

The second version opts for a Radeon RX Vega M GH GPU, with 1,063 and 1,190 megahertz base and boosted clock speeds, 24 compute units. A similar quad-core processor with the same cache will be included, albeit with a higher clock speed of up to 4.2GHz, with a TDP of 100 Watts, though Intel plans to ship this model with an unlocked CPU, GPU, and HBM2, making it an option more attractive to those wanting to overclock the package.




It is claimed the combined processor and GPU takes up less than half the footprint of similar discrete components, and has the potential to significantly slim down notebooks. Intel gives the example of three-year-old notebooks weighing nearly 7 pounds, measuring more than 32mm thick, with only four hours of battery life, while newer models using this style of chip could be under 17mm thick and run for up to eight hours on a single charge.

Intel claims this setup is capable of providing triple the frames per second compared to similar systems released three years ago, and offers a performance boost of around 40 percent compared to current discrete graphics options. It is suggested these chips would be ideal for VR enthusiasts, with them capable of providing the processing power required for VR and mixed reality headsets.

As a demonstration of the new processors' usefulness, Intel also launched a new NUC, formerly codenamed "Hades Canyon," which uses the announced processor in a compact 1.2-liter volume system. Despite the small form factor, Intel claims it is still capable of running VR content, and would be usable by content creators with high workload requirements.

Notebook vendors using the new chips have yet to be confirmed, but are likely to be announced during CES. Pricing and availability are also similarly unknown at the time of publication, but initial hardware may ship by the end of the first quarter of 2018.

As usual, it is uncertain as to whether Apple will take advantage of the new chips in the Mac mini, or in future MacBook and MacBook Pro releases. The current 15-inch MacBook Pro includes discrete Radeon GPUs alongside the integrated Intel HD Graphics 630, so using the launched processors could well be an attractive proposition.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 24
    hodarhodar Posts: 227member

    Put this in a Mac Mini, and make some very minor tweaks - and Apple will sell Mac Mini's at a rate that they cannot keep up with supply.

    1)  DIMM Slots - again, just like the 2012 and earlier versions.  Allow the user to add memory.

    2)  SATA Connector(s) - allow the user to add a second hard drive, or SDD, or simply add two SDD's, again; just like the 2012 and earlier versions.

    The Mac Mini is a small inexpensive INTRODUCTION to the Apple computer environment, it sports no monitor and is just a small form factor, desktop Mac.  The sad fact is that the 2012 Mac Mini with some very inexpensive upgrades will stop the living bejezus out of the top-of the line Mac Mini that is sold today.  Given the money, I will buy the 6 year old Mac Mini - as USED - before I would consider the current stock of Mac Mini's sold at Apple.

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    h2pbrian greenentropysksec
  • Reply 2 of 24
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 1,732member
    Will this have the same meltdown issues other processors have?
  • Reply 3 of 24
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,383member
    Very interested which Intel processors(8th or 9th Gen, and 14++nm or 10nm) will go into the next upgrade of Macbook Pros ? Intel's upcoming i5 and i7 processors for laptops have more cores and threads at lower TDP and higher performance. Urge Apple to keep non touch-strip MBP version and consistent 4 Type-C ports.
    edited January 8 h2p
  • Reply 4 of 24
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,268member
    hodar said:

    Put this in a Mac Mini, and make some very minor tweaks - and Apple will sell Mac Mini's at a rate that they cannot keep up with supply.

    1)  DIMM Slots - again, just like the 2012 and earlier versions.  Allow the user to add memory.

    2)  SATA Connector(s) - allow the user to add a second hard drive, or SDD, or simply add two SDD's, again; just like the 2012 and earlier versions.

    The Mac Mini is a small inexpensive INTRODUCTION to the Apple computer environment, it sports no monitor and is just a small form factor, desktop Mac.  The sad fact is that the 2012 Mac Mini with some very inexpensive upgrades will stop the living bejezus out of the top-of the line Mac Mini that is sold today.  Given the money, I will buy the 6 year old Mac Mini - as USED - before I would consider the current stock of Mac Mini's sold at Apple.

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    SATA !!?? Apple no longer uses the obsolete SATA, all models have NVMExpress SSDs.

    A Mac Mini without NVMExpress and Thunderbolt 3 is not a refresh.
    brian greentmaychiaentropysksecfastasleepwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 24
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,234member
    hodar said:

    Put this in a Mac Mini, and make some very minor tweaks - and Apple will sell Mac Mini's at a rate that they cannot keep up with supply.

    1)  DIMM Slots - again, just like the 2012 and earlier versions.  Allow the user to add memory.

    2)  SATA Connector(s) - allow the user to add a second hard drive, or SDD, or simply add two SDD's, again; just like the 2012 and earlier versions.

    The Mac Mini is a small inexpensive INTRODUCTION to the Apple computer environment, it sports no monitor and is just a small form factor, desktop Mac.  The sad fact is that the 2012 Mac Mini with some very inexpensive upgrades will stop the living bejezus out of the top-of the line Mac Mini that is sold today.  Given the money, I will buy the 6 year old Mac Mini - as USED - before I would consider the current stock of Mac Mini's sold at Apple.

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    1. Computers are going away from this so I doubt it'll have user replaceable RAM. Its cheaper to engineer and produce a product that doesn't have replaceable RAM and also makes the computer more reliable. Less points of failure. 

    2. SATA is old technology, but I suppose they could use it in the $499 model to keep costs down. That doesn't mean you'll have access to it though. 

    For the price point Apple sells a Mac mini at, this isn't going to be like some very scaled down Mac tower mini thats modular. It just isn't going to happen. This will be a "What You Buy Is What You Get" Mac. 

    I'm still thinking Apple will use its own CPU in the next Mac mini. 

    I think this setup will be more suited for the next MacBook Pro, not a cheap sub $800 Mac. 
    tmayfastasleepwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 24
    VRingVRing Posts: 108member
    hodar said:

    Put this in a Mac Mini, and make some very minor tweaks - and Apple will sell Mac Mini's at a rate that they cannot keep up with supply.

    1)  DIMM Slots - again, just like the 2012 and earlier versions.  Allow the user to add memory.

    2)  SATA Connector(s) - allow the user to add a second hard drive, or SDD, or simply add two SDD's, again; just like the 2012 and earlier versions.

    The Mac Mini is a small inexpensive INTRODUCTION to the Apple computer environment, it sports no monitor and is just a small form factor, desktop Mac.  The sad fact is that the 2012 Mac Mini with some very inexpensive upgrades will stop the living bejezus out of the top-of the line Mac Mini that is sold today.  Given the money, I will buy the 6 year old Mac Mini - as USED - before I would consider the current stock of Mac Mini's sold at Apple.

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    The late 2014 Mac mini uses a 15W, up to a 28W, U series chip with integrated graphics. It has a starting price of $499 and an internal power supply.


    The entry Hades Canyon system has no RAM, storage or OS. It uses the 65W i7-8705G, up to a 100W i7-8709G. It has a starting price of $799 and an external power supply.



    A 65W chip won't go in a Mac mini with minor tweaks and once you add a SSD and RAM it would cost well over $1000.

    edited January 8 macxpress
  • Reply 7 of 24
    It’s only quad-cores and based on last year’s microarchitecture, kind disappointed that there aren’t no hex-core available.

    For the actual Coffee-Lake hex-cores, I do heard they runs pretty hot.

    Also, for the RAM support, the G-series only allowed DDR4-2400, based on Intel ARK.

    https://ark.intel.com/products/130409/Intel-Core-i7-8809G-Processor-with-Radeon-RX-Vega-M-GH-graphics-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz
    edited January 8
  • Reply 8 of 24
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,234member
    VRing said:
    hodar said:

    Put this in a Mac Mini, and make some very minor tweaks - and Apple will sell Mac Mini's at a rate that they cannot keep up with supply.

    1)  DIMM Slots - again, just like the 2012 and earlier versions.  Allow the user to add memory.

    2)  SATA Connector(s) - allow the user to add a second hard drive, or SDD, or simply add two SDD's, again; just like the 2012 and earlier versions.

    The Mac Mini is a small inexpensive INTRODUCTION to the Apple computer environment, it sports no monitor and is just a small form factor, desktop Mac.  The sad fact is that the 2012 Mac Mini with some very inexpensive upgrades will stop the living bejezus out of the top-of the line Mac Mini that is sold today.  Given the money, I will buy the 6 year old Mac Mini - as USED - before I would consider the current stock of Mac Mini's sold at Apple.

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    The late 2014 Mac mini uses a 15W, up to a 28W, U series chip with integrated graphics. It has a starting price of $499 and an internal power supply.


    The entry Hades Canyon system has no RAM, storage or OS. It uses the 65W i7-8705G, up to a 100W i7-8709G. It has a starting price of $799 and an external power supply.



    A 65W chip won't go in a Mac mini with minor tweaks and once you add a SSD and RAM it would cost well over $1000.

    Exactly! This I doubt will ever see the light of day in a Mac mini. This is more of the realm of wishful thinking. 
  • Reply 9 of 24
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,506member
    hodar said

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    The eighties called. They said you could keep the business strategy; it didn’t work anyway. 
    xzutmaychiawatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 24
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,234member
    Rayz2016 said:
    hodar said

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    The eighties called. They said you could keep the business strategy; it didn’t work anyway. 
    Yeah I guess I wasn't aware that Apple hasn't made any inroads with Microsoft in recent years? I've always heard Apple actually gained marketshare against Microsoft. I also wasn't aware that Mac mini was the biggest drive in Mac sales back in 2011-2012. I've always heard and read that Mac mini never really was a big seller and continues to be one of the worst selling Macs today, next to Mac Pro which isn't really estimated to ever be a big seller. 
    edited January 8
  • Reply 11 of 24
    tipootipoo Posts: 842member
    Betting this goes in a 15" rMBP refresh. 65W is just about right, the two chips are about 30 each right now already. Moving from 80GB/s bandwidth to 180 will be sweet, even before the extra execution hardware in 200 extra shaders, 16 extra TMUs etc. 21.5" iMac too eventually, Mac Mini would be a welcome bonus (though to keep the price, more likely just an 8th gen quad ULV with Iris Plus). 

    If you look back to the Iris Pro, Apple was actually the one who asked for and pushed for it, so maybe they even pushed for an joint venture like this.
    edited January 8 watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 24
    entropysentropys Posts: 997member
    There are reasons why the crippled current Mac mini doesn’t sell. It’s limitations are so strange you would have to think they were deliberate. As the original post said, the 2012 version is a better machine.

    These days if if you want a useful little desktop you go for a nuc.

    anyway, these chips are more likely MBP and iMac.
    edited January 8 watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 24
    anomeanome Posts: 941member

    I don't know if this will get into a Mac mini. They haven't had a quad-core model for some time now, and my understanding was that this was due to thermal limitations. The latest quad-cores, especially the i7, run too hot to put in a Mac mini chassis. Similar considerations would work against dedicated graphics, and even if this new design lowers the heat output, I expect it will still be a bit high. I'd like to hope it isn't, since then we might finally get a quad-core processor in the 13" MacBook Pro, but I don't think that's likely.

  • Reply 14 of 24
    GG1GG1 Posts: 160member
    entropys said:
    There are reasons why the crippled current Mac mini doesn’t sell. It’s limitations are so strange you would have to think they were deliberate. As the original post said, the 2012 version is a better machine.

    These days if if you want a useful little desktop you go for a nuc.

    anyway, these chips are more likely MBP and iMac.
    I got a 2012 Mini and love it EXCEPT for the crappy Intel graphics. That's why I'd like an updated Mini with this multi-chip or at least with TB3 (for eGPU) - to hold off graphics obsolescence (since I keep Apple hardware 5+ years).

    After writing this, I realize what I really need/want is a poor man's Mac Pro. I doubt Apple want to go in that direction.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 24
    tipoo said:
    Betting this goes in a 15" rMBP refresh. 65W is just about right, the two chips are about 30 each right now already. Moving from 80GB/s bandwidth to 180 will be sweet, even before the extra execution hardware in 200 extra shaders, 16 extra TMUs etc. 21.5" iMac too eventually, Mac Mini would be a welcome bonus (though to keep the price, more likely just an 8th gen quad ULV with Iris Plus). 

    If you look back to the Iris Pro, Apple was actually the one who asked for and pushed for it, so maybe they even pushed for an joint venture like this.
    I hope not, at least not current G-series.  That’s two core less than what it supposed to be, the actual Coffee Lake H-series (8750H and 8850H).

    But I guess sooner or later Intel would do the same with newer microarchitectures.
  • Reply 16 of 24
    entropys said:
    There are reasons why the crippled current Mac mini doesn’t sell. It’s limitations are so strange you would have to think they were deliberate. As the original post said, the 2012 version is a better machine.

    These days if if you want a useful little desktop you go for a nuc.

    anyway, these chips are more likely MBP and iMac.
    What “strange limitations”?
  • Reply 17 of 24
    I’m just wondering if Apple is about to make the leap away from both companies. They have been saying for a while that the A series of processors are desktop class and the graphic cores are more and more powerful. As an example the A9X in my iPad Pro has no issues running sim city but run the same thing on my MacBook Pro 13inch (2017), and thing get warm and a bit jurky, the same is true with my 2013 quad core i7 MacBook Pro with dedicated Nvidia chip with 2gb of ram. Just saying an AMD/intel collaboration just seems odd as they compete on CPUs, 

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 24
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,234member
    GG1 said:
    entropys said:
    There are reasons why the crippled current Mac mini doesn’t sell. It’s limitations are so strange you would have to think they were deliberate. As the original post said, the 2012 version is a better machine.

    These days if if you want a useful little desktop you go for a nuc.

    anyway, these chips are more likely MBP and iMac.
    I got a 2012 Mini and love it EXCEPT for the crappy Intel graphics. That's why I'd like an updated Mini with this multi-chip or at least with TB3 (for eGPU) - to hold off graphics obsolescence (since I keep Apple hardware 5+ years).

    After writing this, I realize what I really need/want is a poor man's Mac Pro. I doubt Apple want to go in that direction.
    I use a mid-2012 Mac Pro tower as my main Mac. Paid about $1000 for it a couple years ago. It already had 16GB of RAM which is plenty for me. I stick an NVIDIA GeForce 970 in it which yes, is missing the boot screen support, but I still have the ATI Radeon 5770 that came in it below the NVIDIA card so if I ever need boot screen support I can quickly swap over to that card and then swap back to the NVIDIA card. I added a USB 3.0 PCIe card for whenever I need USB 3 which isn't often, but it was fairly cheap and works natively on the Mac. I have 2 SSD's in the hard drive bays and 2 1TB 7200 RPM hard drives in the other 2 bays. It works well for my needs and I game with it all the time without any issues at all. For any Windows games, I just boot into Windows using BootCamp and its been perfectly fine. 
    chiawatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 24
    GG1GG1 Posts: 160member
    macxpress said:
    GG1 said:
    entropys said:
    There are reasons why the crippled current Mac mini doesn’t sell. It’s limitations are so strange you would have to think they were deliberate. As the original post said, the 2012 version is a better machine.

    These days if if you want a useful little desktop you go for a nuc.

    anyway, these chips are more likely MBP and iMac.
    I got a 2012 Mini and love it EXCEPT for the crappy Intel graphics. That's why I'd like an updated Mini with this multi-chip or at least with TB3 (for eGPU) - to hold off graphics obsolescence (since I keep Apple hardware 5+ years).

    After writing this, I realize what I really need/want is a poor man's Mac Pro. I doubt Apple want to go in that direction.
    I use a mid-2012 Mac Pro tower as my main Mac. Paid about $1000 for it a couple years ago. It already had 16GB of RAM which is plenty for me. I stick an NVIDIA GeForce 970 in it which yes, is missing the boot screen support, but I still have the ATI Radeon 5770 that came in it below the NVIDIA card so if I ever need boot screen support I can quickly swap over to that card and then swap back to the NVIDIA card. I added a USB 3.0 PCIe card for whenever I need USB 3 which isn't often, but it was fairly cheap and works natively on the Mac. I have 2 SSD's in the hard drive bays and 2 1TB 7200 RPM hard drives in the other 2 bays. It works well for my needs and I game with it all the time without any issues at all. For any Windows games, I just boot into Windows using BootCamp and its been perfectly fine. 
    A quick check of eBay, MacSales, etc. shows that the price hasn't really decreased below $1000 (I looked at 2012 models). I guess there's still a lot of value/demand in these upgradeable ones.
    chiawatto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 24
    netroxnetrox Posts: 563member
    hodar said:

    Put this in a Mac Mini, and make some very minor tweaks - and Apple will sell Mac Mini's at a rate that they cannot keep up with supply.

    1)  DIMM Slots - again, just like the 2012 and earlier versions.  Allow the user to add memory.

    2)  SATA Connector(s) - allow the user to add a second hard drive, or SDD, or simply add two SDD's, again; just like the 2012 and earlier versions.

    The Mac Mini is a small inexpensive INTRODUCTION to the Apple computer environment, it sports no monitor and is just a small form factor, desktop Mac.  The sad fact is that the 2012 Mac Mini with some very inexpensive upgrades will stop the living bejezus out of the top-of the line Mac Mini that is sold today.  Given the money, I will buy the 6 year old Mac Mini - as USED - before I would consider the current stock of Mac Mini's sold at Apple.

    This is a chance for Apple to not only refresh the aging Mac Mini; but to also make some inroads against Windows (Mr. Cook, you do remember MSFT, don't you?)

    Just no. A Mac mini shouldn't even have any legacy ports. Just pure Thunderbolt 3 to support all popular protocols. It should encourage people to buy devices with USB 3.1 Type C or TB3. Come think of it - even a regular power cable will be history since USB 3.1 Type C can support up to 100W. A mini should strive for minimalism.
    chiawatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.