Sources: BBC News, Electronista
quote: I think this article should be written by a person who understands the market a bit more.
quote: Honestly, how many laptop users use PS-CS6 or play "intensive" games on the laptops? Casual gamers would love better battery life than better graphics (may not be true for all, but for most!)
quote: IVB graphics are at par with most low-end graphics cards. IVB media functionality surpasses all the discrete cards (far more superior to AMD's transcode solution). I am guessing that's more important than casual gaming.Let's see other than browsing, office (productivity), coding (might be only a few, but still there), music, watching videos, running apps, cloud services, etc etc... WTH, I see that all of them require a better CPU than a better graphics.
quote: If AMD can beat Intel in graphics-enabled applications such as Adobe Systems Inc.'s (ADBE) Photoshop CS6 and various games
quote: Actual product level performance depends on pricing, binning and the market. For instance, Intel has an edge for very low power designs due to process technology. The 22nm FinFETs are exceptionally efficient at low voltage and it is likely that Ivy Bridge will match Trinity for 17W designs. At 25-35W for conventional notebooks, Intel should trail by around 20%, which is close enough to be competitive.
quote: the question is what if any good Intel's much more powerful CPU cores are for laptop users.