Is that right?
The clock speed of the INTEL CORE I7-4750HQ was 800Mhz lower than the INTEL CORE I7-4900MQ.
The HQ also has 2MB less cache, and the GPU clock speed was 100Mhz lower than that of the MQ - and still it wiped the floor with the MQ in some games.
If that's right
detail checking aside (though, at casual glance, they do look right), what the published results aptly demonstrate, in respect to that for a large number of games, is where the performance limiting facet lies ... i.e. it ain't the processor
Oh, I wasn't clear. I think there will be a niche market for discrete cards, not only for high end gaming, but also for graphics workstations. But the pace at which the integrated graphics have started covering the needs of mainstream users is outstanding. And I don't see the trend slowing down, but rather gaining steam.
Gaming consoles are a great example of how far things went, already. They are all running APU's.
It's not that we see some kind of breakthrough with APUs, they are able to play mainstream games because consoles have stagnated the market. Seriously, XBox 360 is 8 years old now! And Xbone is even weaker compared to regular PC than Xbox 360 was at its launch.
In other words, it would be a sign of something being deeply wrong with the APU market if the current situation didn't happen.