Acer Details Iconia W700 Windows 8 11.6-Inch Tablet PC

[zakislam]

Prices range from $799 to $999.

Acer Details Iconia W700 Windows 8 11.6-Inch Tablet PC : Read more

 

[mikenygmail]

MUCH too expensive, resolution far too low. Samsung’s P10 has an 11.8 inch display and 2560x1600 resolution, for much less money.

 

[beardguy]

Nope.


Even if the high price is due to this tablet basically being a laptop equivalent, the interface is not good enough to actually be productive (do actual work).

 

[mikenygmail]

Exactly, it's just an overpriced tablet that doesn't even have a 1080p front facing camera.
Intel graphics are laughable as well on something this expensive.

 

[mikenygmail]

The days of overpriced portables are over. All must now be priced at $500 or less, and that must include a reasonably powerful GPU. We need a nice tablet around that price or less with a 1920x1200 or better display and AMD APU or Intel/Nvidia/Whatever equivalent.

 

[DjEaZy]

... sooo don't give a $#!t....

 

[Yargnit]

Im confused. Engaget reported the 128GB model had an i3, here the 128GB is listed with the i5. Which is it?

 

[lpedraja2002]

I like this idea, since its Windows 8 it gives a much better experience being a laptop/tablet hybrid. Heck, one might be able to do some decent gaming with a bluetooth mouse, provided those Intel HD 4000 are any good even at lower resolutions.

I would have also liked for a cheaper device that has a lower resolution screen, more variety for other people, and to make it even better equipped with an AMD APU.

 

[teh_chem]

I don't like seeing this BS "up to" 9 hours of battery life. How much will actual usage be? Reviews will be quite valuable. Unless there are very very new and novel methods of power-reduction, I can't fathom this battery life for anything remotely resembling practical use--but I am hopefully optimistic.

I'd really like to know how much video-playback time these get.

But I have to say, if I needed a productivity device vs. a media consumption device, I'd get a Windows8 tablet in a heartbeat over any of the other tablet offerings. But since my work provides a laptop for work, it's not like I need a personal productivity device for much of anything.

I hope windows 8 tablets will force some modicum of standards and consistency for android tablets. The advantage of the android platform is also its undoing--diversity in hardware platforms. I have and use my android tablet, but the user experience isn't always the best (that's an understatement).

 

[rebel1280]

I actually like this, tablet with netbook appeal. 799 a bit high but i would pay 500-650 for this for sure! Though im guessing the SSD and the use of Intel is taking up a HUGE chunk of profit. I dont understand why they dont use AMD APUs

 

[Guest]

The GPU here is Intel HD4000, which runs faster than many AMD APU graphics unit or entry level NVidia GPU. The Intel CPU and Microsoft OS itself has taken a chunk of the cost so it is unlikely Windows 8 tablet will be priced at $500 range. Usability will remain a problem as the touch optimized applications on Windows 8 platform are still way too few. 64GB model will be horrid as Windows OS itself takes up 20GB which leave little room with data. And why there is no microSD card? That will look a lot better than having a USB drive stick to the side.

Most traditional applications will work better with a keyboard and mouse. Trying to click on those tiny button and menu on a 1920x1080 resolution using finger is an exercise in frustration.

 

[falchard]

overpriced paperweights. They are all paired with Intel IGP which just means they are ***. Last years A500 and W500 will do laps around these overpriced paperweights because they have actual graphics chips.

 

[belardo]

None of these are 3G or 4G, they look fine... but like the continued failure of intels "ultrabooks" - these are over-priced. Not quite seeing who is going to buy these.

There is nothing really NEW here... the x86 tablets have been around $1000~1400 for the past 3 years.

[citation][nom]tabletman[/nom]The GPU here is Intel HD4000, which runs faster than many AMD APU graphics unit or entry level NVidia GPU.[/citation] LOL!! HD4000 doesn't come close to AMD APUs... at the top of AMD, they are about double the ability of the HD4000.

 

[Guest]

A lot of people here are misinformed about the capabilities of HD4000. Please check the review, benchmark or passmark before commenting remark such as GPU in W500 being faster. As far top of AMD GPU being faster, what else do you expect comparing top of anything against entry level part? But even mid range of AMD APU is not faster than HD4000. For details, check passmark. Do not mistake HD4000 for HD3000.

 

[mikenygmail]

Intel's paid pumpers are thumbing down all the reasonable comments, haha!

 

[back_by_demand]

The tablet specs look nice but as long as a Surface Pro can match 4Gb of RAM I will be going that way, that plasticy thing that it docks into the Acer is just NASTY, the Surface kickstand and magnet-on cover/keyboard is just better all over.

 

[teh_chem]

[citation][nom]tabletman2[/nom]A lot of people here are misinformed about the capabilities of HD4000. Please check the review, benchmark or passmark before commenting remark such as GPU in W500 being faster. As far top of AMD GPU being faster, what else do you expect comparing top of anything against entry level part? But even mid range of AMD APU is not faster than HD4000. For details, check passmark. Do not mistake HD4000 for HD3000.[/citation]
Except given that the CPU in this thing is an i5 (decent--definitely not low-end), so why would someone hypothetically substitute it with a low-end APU? If you wanted to just match CPUs based on TDP, the i5-3317U is a 17w CPU. The best match would be the A6-4455M (it's a 17w TDP chip) which has the HD7500G, which pretty much matches HD4000 in performance--the HD4K isn't impressive in comparison). That's basically the lowest-performing GPU in AMDs mobile APU lineup, but better GPUs in the higher TDP APUs. If you want to make a comparison, at least use similarly-spec'd components. Don't just arbitrarily pick low-end if it is nowhere near the performance of the thing you're comparing it to.

 

[Guest]

A good comparison is to indeed match CPU based on its power assumption, while a AMD Trinity A10 has twice the GPU performance than Intel HD4000, A10 is a 100w part, and therefore horrible to be used in a tablet. A6-4455M is a good match, HD7500G has slightly slower benchmark score than HD4000, according to passmark. So one of these days someone will put this into W8 tablet. No one is doing it now as Trinity has just been released, engineer needs some time to work things out. It is not me who brought up W500 for comparison if you read the previous comments. Someone else claimed "Last years A500 and W500 will do laps around these overpriced paperweights because they have actual graphics chips." I actually owned one W500 and that is simply not true. i5 and HD4000 will put W500 to shame, which uses C-60 APU. The vendors are currently usually put HD4000 into the tablets because this is the only reasonable choice that has been around for awhile. No doubt we will see more choices in the market when the engineers have more time to work with Trinity. After all, everyone knows cheaper (at same performance) means better sales.