Hacker News Reader

> Their machines are still far more expensive than Windows

Which $1000 Windows laptop has this performance?

> and can't use high-powered GPUs like AMD/Nvidia.

Not relevant to all markets (particularly ultra bookish laptops, which never have discrete GPUs, but more broadly many people just don't need one).

I don't think it changes anything much immediately, but it's extremely bad news for Intel in the long run.

View on HN

Do people actually care about GPUs in their laptops? It seems like any semi-serious gamer would have strong incentives to have a desktop (modular, the prestige of building you own rig). And anyone using GPUs for compute is just going to remote into some server.

The difference is that you can buy something specced to your needs. Most users and even most developers won't be bottlenecked by even an i5. Getting a quad-core Windows/Intel laptop with a 1080 screen, 16GB and upgrade slots for RAM or disk, plus all the output ports for an external monitor is easily under $1000 for even a name brand. My $800 Acer does fine and has an onboard ethernet port because my most resource-intensive application that I use daily is Zoom. And it has an entry-level Nvidia card.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com