Why are there no Clevo notebooks with high end cpus with integrated graphics?

Intel with the i7-8559U, as well as AMD with the Ryzen 7 2700U, both produce powerful mobile CPUs with also quite powerful integrated GPUs. Both processors also have a low TDP, so they run cool, and long on a battery.

Combine them with high end 4k 100% Adobe RGB displays, and you have a magnificent notebook.

And yet, Clevo has no such notebook. For some reason Clevo insists on using other CPUs with separate graphic cards, producing bigger, far more expensive, and power hungry notebooks.

Now you will say that those integrated graphics are not powerful enough for gaming. True, but guess what, not all people are into gaming!!

Is there any chance that Clevo may produce the kind of notebook I'm looking for, or will they stay fixated on gaming notebooks?

 

Here's Clevo's entire range:
https://www.clevo.com.tw/clevo_pro.asp?lang=en

Resellers pick and choose what models to stock, and from what I understand, they have to be selective as to what they choose to stock as minimum order quantities are high. Given that portables and ultraportables from the larger known brands are backed with a cohesive and far bigger budget marketing spend and support infrastructure, I assume resellers choose models from different brands to fill that niche. The workstation Clevos, which are usually quite similar to the high end gamers but with significantly less graphics power, seem very rare by comparison to their gaming models (on ebay etc)

 

...um, what's exactly your point? If you're not into gaming, there are Clevos with an i7 8565u. If you're even a casual gamer, an integrated graphics is absolutely worthless, and an MX 150 is the absolute minimum to play relatively recent games at low/medium details in Full HD. So... what exactly is the market for the 8559u? Maybe the Surface Pro or convertibles where a dedicated card wouldn't fit, but other than else?

 

Re-read OP carefully:

The market is for people that do CPU intensive work that isn't at all GPU-bound. I'm sure you can think of a few use cases?

 

In that case, the major OEMs (Dell, HP, Lenovo) have that market pretty well covered. Clevo is more of a niche brand. I'm sure the higher-ups there have considered doing what the OP is asking but ultimately couldn't justify a business case for it.

 

You are probably right about the business case.
Although there are enough people and cases who really dont care about GPU. Perhaps not enough for a business case.....
The oem’s you mentioned are not well known for putting desktop cpu’s in laptops.
I would like to see clevo offer such powerfull laptops with optimus

 

That's never going to happen. The market for laptops with desktop CPUs is a subset of a subset, and the overwhelming majority of people who buy them couldn't care less about battery life.

 

The post still doesn't make sense to me. I get that the 8559u has an higher clock, but he specifically mentions the GPU as a pro:

Why should one care about GPU in such a product if, as you say, we are talking about CPU intensive tasks? BTW, in such case, wouldn't a laptop with an 8750h and no dGPU be simply better?

 

The i7-8565u has a frequency of 1.8 GHz and the UHD Graphics 620. The i7-8559u has a frequency of 2.7 GHz, and the much more powerful UHD Graphics plus 655. The price is almost the same. Socket is the same, so why not use the i7-8559u???

 

Indeed, and the GPUs in these processors are much better then the GPUs in the other mobile CPUs. It is a very nice compromise between simple notebooks with simple GPUs, and higher end notebooks with separate graphics cards. Combining it with a high-end display, and you have a very nice notebook for photo and film work.

 

Indeed, the processors I mentioned have GPUs that are much more powerful than the standard GPUs in mobile (and desktop) processors. Not powerful enough for gaming, but perfect for photo and video work.

No, the i7-8750h is a six-core CPU with a lower frequency. A lot of photo and video software is single thread, so the quad-core i7-8559u is better for such jobs.

 

15W vs 28W parts.

They are meant for different chassis really.

 

Sure, but not that much different. The difference would be far more if you would have to add a separate graphics card.

 

Almost double the power is never insignificant o the design.

 

Depends from where you start, you could also say half the power. Anyway, it is far less of a difference than a 45 Watt CPU plus a graphics card, I'm sure you will agree.

 

A 15W CPU plus a 25W GPU is going to massively out perform the 45CPU with integrated graphics.

 

Sure, but AMD's top model APU was 25W, and now it is even 15W. If that performance is sufficient, why add a graphics card? I now have an Nvidia graphics card next to the Intel graphics of my CPU. The Nvidia is useless, it is never activated. It only costs money, and it used to be that it needed new drivers about every three weeks or so.

 

If the nvidia gpu is never active the standard Intel igp is all you need.

 

Not necessarily. Some programs may attach to the active graphics, and not switch to Nvidia even if its has more power.

 

Would like one with a 8850H or higher, could have a beefier heat sink with the extra room so temps aren't crazy and loud and use a TB3 egpu for games if you want to too

 

That's very easy to fix if that's happening.

 

You could purchase a Precision 7530 with a Xeon, and no iGPU.

I sincerely don't know what you mean, but most workstations dedicated to media processing have very high core counts, because media editing, by its very nature, is highly parallelisable.

 

No, I don't want to game.

 

Yeah but others would

 

It's very simple. Intel and AMD both have mobile CPU's with GPU's that are far more powerful then the GPU of any desktop processor. They are about as powerful as low end graphic cards. The Intel i7-8559U is such a processor, 4 cores, and the best integrated GPU intel has, with 128 MB fast on chip memory. and the whole processor has a TDP of just 28 Watt. Combine it with a 4k 100% Adobe RGB display, and you have an excellent notebook for photo editing. Now you have the choice between low end mobile CPU's with low and GPU's, or high end CPU's with a separate graphics card, there's nothing in between.

 

I'm sure, but there are plenty of notebooks out the that they can use. The whole world seems to think that buyers of notebooks just want to do a bit of mailing and browsing, or they want to game. But there are plenty of other things you can do with a notebook, and then the processors I would like to have in a notebook would be perfect for the job.

 

Not really that many that are decent, and most of those have the same CPU heatsink as the dgpu version of the same model(like a hp zbook 15), would rather the space be used for a beefier heatsink than others if temps aren't limited by die size.
I don't really see why you quoted that comment anyways TB3 can be used for other things and the laptops in your use scenario and people who would use it for egpu gaming are the same

 

I understand that.

My point is that you'll still get more performance out of any of the hexa-core CPUs than the 8559U, and what I didn't understand was why you were gunning for a CPU with such a low TDP. It has a 4.5 GHz single-core clock speed. It runs at 4.1 GHz on all four cores, and that would skyrocket the power draw to ~ 40 W. If your notebook is unable to dissipate this sort of power draw, then the clock speed rating is useless.

I have never seen an argument for clock speed in media editing. Nearly everyone I know who's in the media industry opted for a hexa-core CPU in their laptops; if they were running a desktop, the Ryzen Threadripper.

The 8559U literally only has the clock speed going for it (and perhaps the iGPU).

There's this neat article that basically summarises my point: more cores is better.

The 8850H, for instance, runs 2 more cores than the 8559U at the same all-core clock speed. You are bound to see a roughly 33% improvement in multi-core performance.

 

The AMD 2400G would disagree...

The i7-8559u is completely incapable of keeping to that 30W TDP. The PL2 power limit on it is 50W and it DOES draw that for about 3 seconds.
You can see a review of it in a NUC here:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-NUC-Kit-NUC8i7BEH-i7-8559U-Mini-PC-Review.360356.0.html

The NUC under load draws 59W (peak 78W) and it has no dGPU or screen or anything else to drive. Put it under Prime95 and Furmark and it throttles to a piddly 998mhz because the iGPU and CPU cores must share that 30W power budget between them. So just imagine how much worse it would be in a laptop where it has to drive a display as well. ULVs are just not good for serious processing and when you step up to a H processor, most workloads will also benefit from a half-decent GPU.