But it also stops AMD CPU division launching any other product above those because the EMIB deal cements Intel's position in that market all for a low margin revenue for Radeon, which is what I said from the beginning;
It won't stop AMD from launching a product they effectively don't have.
no-one knows what other products the CPU division had lined up or was thinking of doing.
AMD knows. If they had a 50-100W mobile APU with HBM2 lined up for 2018/2019 release, perhaps this deal wouldn't even exist.
Instead, what they have right now is only 2 dies: 2*CCX GPU-less and 1*CCX + 11*NCU.
The only other APU solutions we've heard about so far in leaks are the
4*CCX (maybe just 2 of the current dies) + Vega Greenland for HPC which is definitely unable to fit within that 50-100W budget even at 7nm, and the 0.5*CCX + 3 NCU SoC at 4-15W.
Furthermore, Intel will now be doing their own discrete GPUs, meaning this semi-custom deal from AMD won't be a long one.
If Intel comes up with their own GPU family in 3/4 years, that's how much time AMD has to develop a high performance APU within the 50-100W range.
Until then, AMD just gains marketshare in the notebook market.
Quad-Core (15W) plus HBM2 (10ish W) plus mid-sized GPU (45-ish W best case) is too much TDP to get rid of in a more business oriented chassis with accetable noise levels.
10W for a single stack of HBM2? Where have you seen that? Last I checked HBM1 was at less than 5W per stack.
EDIT: All I could find was anandtech's math on HBM1:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/9883/gddr5x-standard-jedec-new-gpu-memory-14-gbps
15W for 4x stacks in Fiji. Less than 4W per HBM1 stack. You think a single HBM2 stack is going to consume 10W?
You said in your previous post that you could see EMIB being used only in the MacBook Pro since competing Windows laptops don't have enough volume. But Nvidia isn't used in MacBooks and therefore wouldn't be affected by EMIB.
The Macbook Pro has enough demand to justify the existence of this chip, unlike sparse models from other OEMs within the same price range.
This doesn't stop other OEMs from purchasing Kaby Lake G solutions from Intel, when it becomes available.
Same thing happened with apple being partially responsible for Intel developing their GT3 and GT3e solutions. Apple was the customer whose demand justified the development, but then other OEMs adopted the solution.
If the Kaby Lake G has better performance and efficiency, other OEMs will want to use it instead of the typical KBL-H + GTX1050. For the appropriate price points, of course.
Is nobody going to point out the fact the board doesn't have a secondary main chip, aka PCH? Does the chip have everything, making it a real SoC? Is the "custom" AMD part providing the PCH function? Or is the leftover x8 slot on the CPU used for IO? I think this information is significant in itself.
Core H models use an external PCH in the motherboard. Only the dual-core Y/U series have a PCH in the substrate.
I don't think the semi-custom GPU has southbridge functionality. Intel's Core H have a dedicated 4GB/s connection (4*DMI 3 links) for the PCH, and I've seen several sources claiming the CPU-GPU connection is simply the PCIe links from the integrated northbridge.
