Would love one of those at work.

Any idea where I can buy this ?

It is good looking, but APU with similar CPU performance (and proportionally weaker GPU) can be had for 1/2 of price. But it is still great looking and cool system. This is exactly design I wanted in notebooks. One small PCB with everything needed, a lot of space for battery. No wasted space with additional mGPU. I am sure a lot of people will like it.

A bit odd that the graphics in this is better than the graphics offerings from AMD's own lineup, at least currently (I'm sure if a 2500G comes out, it'll be as good or better). But, as good as the specs are, this is a bit expensive. For that price, I'd rather get a laptop with similar specs. At least then speakers, a display, keyboard, trackpad, and battery would be included.

TDP 100W it will be noisy.. I would like to see good GPUs in 35W or 65W TPD package.

Awesome little machine. Pricey, but I can see this selling well. I think AMD might have shot themselves in the foot...

ruthan:

TDP 100W it will be noisy.. I would like to see good GPUs in 35W or 65W TPD package.

There is a 65W version... A fully passive design, that's what I REALLY want to see. If it's something like 10-15W in notebooks, should be doable at 50W in NUC

Nice..... I would love to see the performance numbers on this bad boy.... Especially how it will keep that thermal throttling from being an issue for reaching that higher end performance they're touting from this particular hardware. Cooling....cooling....cooling is what I want to know about....

Noisiv:

I think AMD might have shot themselves in the foot...

It seems a few people have this sentiment, though AMD is selling GPU dies to Intel and anyone buying the Intel/AMD GPU solution is going to be paying an arm and a leg for system. AMD APU with Vega is still cheaper and very cost effective which is why I don't share this sentiment. Sure the CPU isn't as good and the GPU is a bit smaller, but like you said it's gonna be like 1/2 the price. On the other hand, if you want the best, Intel just provided it.

Pinscher:

It seems a few people have this sentiment, though AMD is selling GPU dies to Intel and anyone buying the Intel/AMD GPU solution is going to be paying an arm and a leg for system. AMD APU with Vega is still cheaper and very cost effective which is why I don't share this sentiment. Sure the CPU isn't as good and the GPU is a bit smaller, but like you said it's gonna be like 1/2 the price. On the other hand, if you want the best, Intel just provided it.

I agree nearly 800 USD just for these two is alot, since the 2500U is what 150USD?

At that price, it's junk.

I think those confused as to why AMD would allow Intel to "compete" with their own APUs are underestimating the GPU power in these new Intel packages. These solutions have 24 & 20 CUs respectively in a 100W TDP with 4GB of HBM2 onboard. Compare that to the 11 & 8 CUs in AMD's APU offerings, with a 65W TDP and dependence on standard DDR4 RAM. It's clear that the Intel "G" and AMD "G" series products are in totally different tiers of performance and price. They only compete like the RX580 "competes" with the 1080ti. Some buyers may consider both, but many (most?) buyers will come it with a ballpark budget and/or ballpark performance requirements in mind and only genuinely consider the tier of products that meet their needs/align with their budget. The second question is why AMD didn't provide a product in this tier themselves. AMD could, no doubt, deliver something like a Ryzen 7 2700G with ~100W TDP, a larger GPU and on-package HBM2. Just to put this into perspective though, AMD's entire Ryzen based lineup come from the grand total of just 2 different die designs. The Ryzen 3 1200 right through Threadripper and EPYC products are all built from between one and four of the original "zen" dies that first appeared in the Ryzen 7 1800X, featuring 8 cores across 2 CCXs with no GPU. AMD's second and final current die design is then used for their mobile (15W) and desktop APU linups featuring a 4 core, single CCX CPU with an 11CU (?) Vega GPU. Obviously lower tier products get cut down, but the point is, there's only 2 unique dies used for AMD's entire Ryzen based lineup of products. Producing a high end APU with onboard HBM2 would require a third design. Sure it would be a competitive and interesting product, but considering design #1 & #2 have resulted in competitive products ranging from 15-180W and $100 - $4200, AMD would likely want something more versatile from design #3 than a niche product like a high end APU with onboard HBM. Intel, on the other hand, have greater market share and vastly more engineering resources, so they're in a much better position to custom design dies for relatively niche products like this. Better for AMD, it would seem, to allow Intel to own that market segment by selling them your product and focus your limited resources on more versatile designs.