<i>I&#x27;m a game developer, and it might just be the first time I can work on a laptop with integrated graphics.</i><p>Please don&#x27;t :). New iGPUs may be catching up to old dGPUs, but meanwhile new dGPUs are just skyrocketing in power far beyond them.<p>I made this chart to easily see relative performance of most common notebook GPUs:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;alteredqualia.com&#x2F;texts&#x2F;notebooks&#x2F;nvidia-gpus.png" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;alteredqualia.com&#x2F;texts&#x2F;notebooks&#x2F;nvidia-gpus.png</a><p>Or if you are interested in both desktop and notebook GPUs relative performances:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;alteredqualia.com&#x2F;tools&#x2F;gpus&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;alteredqualia.com&#x2F;tools&#x2F;gpus&#x2F;</a><p>What Intel does is great for rising minimal specs you can expect in notebook graphics, but you can do much better than that, even cheap modern dGPUs wipe out the best iGPUs. You can extrapolate Skylake Iris Pro from Intel marketing claims vs older Iris Pros, it&#x27;s going to be better but not Earth-shatteringly better.<p>And this gap is just going to get wider in 2016, with HBM2 and 16 nm node sizes finally coming to GPUs (both to Nvidia with Pascal and AMD with Arctic Islands).