Back to Article

  • GTRagnarok - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Pretty disappointing that it's a rebrand. I also have a 7970M in an M17x that I regularly overclock past 900Mhz for gaming. Nvidia is definitely more interesting in the high-end mobile space, but you always pay quite the premium. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    I thought it was already established that this would be a rebrand. At least I didn't expect new chips. What I was hoping for was some better power characteristics that would allow faster clock speeds (10+% at least). Well, I don't game on laptops, so personally, I couldn't care less. Reply
  • swing848 - Friday, May 17, 2013 - link

    The poor economy is partly to blame, perhaps the main reason for what is happening, even Intel will keep 22nm alive for some time, even though 1155 motherboards are a dead end.

    With more people having less money, or out of work, companies will not want to invest great sums into new technology, factories or retooling factories as quickly as they did in the past decade.
  • SunLord - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    With the entire "next gen" of Radeon HD card being nothing but rebrands I'm starting to doubt AMD is going to keep using the Radeon HD branding when it finally rolls out entirely new chips. Reply
  • superjim - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    nVidia does this as well. It's a pretty standard practice the past several years on both desktop and mobile. Each new process gets at least 2 cycles (original release + 1 rebrand). Reply
  • jasonelmore - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Its standard practice for low to mid mGPU's but not Flagship GPU's. Reply
  • Calinou__ - Monday, May 27, 2013 - link

    Will their next gen be named Radeon UHD? That is the question. :D Reply
  • Meaker10 - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Es samples show full gk104 with boost clocks and now full 1250mhz gddr5 for the 780m. A gtx680/770 desktop card at reduced clocks that can hit full desktop clocks.... Reply
  • MohdZeyad - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Why they did not compare it to the GTX 680MX, I think the GTX 680MX is the faster one Reply
  • Meaker10 - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Because the mx was a mac all in one exclusive, it was never put in a mobile system. Reply
  • MohdZeyad - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Thanks for the clarification :) Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    AFAIK it was never officially an exclusive; the only issue was that the 680MX's power consumption was too high for even the portable desktop class laptops. If anyone else wanted to make an AIO with an ultra high end gpu they could've used the 680MX too. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Because they would not look as good? But probably also because that card will cost several hundred more than the 8970M. The 680M will likely cost more as well, judging by past high end laptop card prices. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    As others noted above, 680MX is ~125W power draw and has never been used in a laptop. I'm hoping they can get the power down and 780MX will be similar in performance to the 680MX. Reply
  • Tuvok86 - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Well you kind of answered your own question xD Reply
  • whyso - Wednesday, May 15, 2013 - link

    Whats with this "moving forward leaping backward"? What's up with your rebrands AMD? Why is the 88xx series weaker than the 78xx series (which has 800mhz core clock and same number of shaders). Why is the 89xx series more than twice as fast as the 88xx series. The 77xx series has 512 shaders at speeds of 575-675 mhz and is going to perform very comparably to 384 shaders at 650-850mhz. There is little to no performance gain here.

    Nvidia is doing a fairly good complete revamp of their line. 750m now at speeds of 967mhz+ (vs 835 for 650m), 760m looks like a 768 core part. 780m looks to be full GK104 at faster ram speeds. C'mon AMD.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now