jblagden

Here is my conspiracy theory:

Intel don't want eGPUS to happen through TB (or at all) by making them un-financially viable.

The reason I have figured out for this, is to get the maximum performance, a fairly powerful Intel quad-core desktop can be procuredfor the same price as the III-D.

They don't want a docked laptop to be as fast as a desktop, so when someone needs mobility and desk-bound performance, they are forced into buying a laptop and desktop both with Intel silicon.

The same shows with Ultrabooks, they are not pushing displayport at all, and when you do get one with displayport, MST isn't supported so you can't really run multiple monitors easily. I think Intel now see most laptops as companion devices, or at least more dumbed down than stuff like the proper EliteBooks.

This is further evidenced by the dropping of 16x 3.0 PCIe lanes from Haswell ULV.

I know many businesses would be served fine by eGPU laptops, but as it's not a viable solution they would rather just have to buy two separate machines, thus more money into Intel's pockets.

Same goes for NVidia, they would rather you have to buy a gaming laptop, and a desktop, both with GeForce, than just one GPU.

I agree. The least expensive eGPU chassis from Sonnet is $400. For that price, you can buy an IBM clone desktop. For that price, you might as well buy one. Most people aren't going to spend $400 on the chassis. I certainly wouldn't be willing to spend that much just on that part of an eGPU setup. $400 is the most I'm willing to spend on an eGPU as a whole, not just for that one item. This is why I've created a petition at Change.org regarding this issue: https://www.change.org/petitions/intel-allow-silverstone-and-asus-to-sell-the-asus-sg-station-2-and-allow-villagetronics-to-sell-the-4th-generation-vidock-in-essence-allow-the-sale-of-affordable-egpu-enclosures