Thanks, I didn't find in the test that you use external display. And the i3 Dell is valid as a comparison, more than a B960 Pentium. Of course, is crap POS plastic build, comparing to let's say Asus X202E, but in this price range Kabini prototype is not be better.
- Status
Thanks, I didn't find in the test that you use external display. And the i3 Dell is valid as a comparison, more than a B960 Pentium. Of course, is crap POS plastic build, comparing to let's say Asus X202E, but in this price range Kabini prototype is not be better.
Can we please stop using slower rated ram for these AMD processor reviews. The processor is rated at 1600 ddr3 ram speeds and Tom's again uses slower rated 1333 ram. The pentium that the A4 is competing against is not rated for 1600. This would show the true standing when competing against the market it is setting up for.
Unlike the pentium, the Core i3 will have the A6 to compete against as per the one slide that Tom's just happened to not include in this review called "2013 Competitive Positioning" found on other Tech Spot sites. The core i3 also supports 1600 ddr3 timings, and should be shown to run better then it was as well.
a Model T costs alot today, but is no where near as fast as a cheap sedan (very different markets). Price is nice to include for a metric, but does not show the correct market Kabini is slated for.
~Majorlag
Unlike the pentium, the Core i3 will have the A6 to compete against as per the one slide that Tom's just happened to not include in this review called "2013 Competitive Positioning" found on other Tech Spot sites. The core i3 also supports 1600 ddr3 timings, and should be shown to run better then it was as well.
a Model T costs alot today, but is no where near as fast as a cheap sedan (very different markets). Price is nice to include for a metric, but does not show the correct market Kabini is slated for.
~Majorlag
Cleeve Quote :
"As we stated, we used the same hard disk and memory across all platforms, and eliminated the display from our testing by using external. We tested the i3-3217U, not the HP sleekbook.
The i3-3217U performs in these tests just as it would in a $360 Dell:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...."
Let's look at that Dell 13z which had an original list price (according to Amazon and Laptopmag) of around $600! Looking at the most recent Amazon reviews you see the user complaints: "broke in a few days" , "not working after light use", "wish that it would work".... Dell HAS to use cheaper low spec components to offset the HIGHER CPU price and that economics should be pasted to your monitor.
Also citing Dell who like other OEMs admitted were illegally paid off billions by Intel not to use AMD CPUs is something to think about. We also became aware of hardware review sites that distort benchmarks to cast Intel in the most favorable light.
Finally, here is the heat and temperature review of the Dell 13z and find out why the price drops so much:
"After streaming a Hulu video for 15 minutes, the touchpad measured 77 degrees Fahrenheit, the space between the G and H keys hit 81 degrees and the bottom of the notebook registered 87 degrees. We did find one spot -- the right side of the bottom, halfway down -- that reached 112 degrees. We consider anything above 95 degrees uncomfortable and anything above 100 degrees unpleasant."
So it confirms that using Intel chips other than Atoms and Celerons in a laptop, may cause the user and machine to heat to an uncomfortable or even physically dangerous level."
"As we stated, we used the same hard disk and memory across all platforms, and eliminated the display from our testing by using external. We tested the i3-3217U, not the HP sleekbook.
The i3-3217U performs in these tests just as it would in a $360 Dell:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...."
Let's look at that Dell 13z which had an original list price (according to Amazon and Laptopmag) of around $600! Looking at the most recent Amazon reviews you see the user complaints: "broke in a few days" , "not working after light use", "wish that it would work".... Dell HAS to use cheaper low spec components to offset the HIGHER CPU price and that economics should be pasted to your monitor.
Also citing Dell who like other OEMs admitted were illegally paid off billions by Intel not to use AMD CPUs is something to think about. We also became aware of hardware review sites that distort benchmarks to cast Intel in the most favorable light.
Finally, here is the heat and temperature review of the Dell 13z and find out why the price drops so much:
"After streaming a Hulu video for 15 minutes, the touchpad measured 77 degrees Fahrenheit, the space between the G and H keys hit 81 degrees and the bottom of the notebook registered 87 degrees. We did find one spot -- the right side of the bottom, halfway down -- that reached 112 degrees. We consider anything above 95 degrees uncomfortable and anything above 100 degrees unpleasant."
So it confirms that using Intel chips other than Atoms and Celerons in a laptop, may cause the user and machine to heat to an uncomfortable or even physically dangerous level."
- Jul 27, 2011
- 42,737
- 855
- 104,940
I'd be really interested in seeing how these low cost, low power CPUs like the AMD E-series and the Intel Silvermounts would be put to use in things other than PCs, ultra books, and tablets. Things like auto navigation systems, portable video game consoles, high end digital cameras, health care equipment, mall and airport kiosks, POS terminals, in flight entertainment systems, things of that nature would be really interesting. These things could really be game changers.
You have totally missed the point
At $350 you can get a bulky Pentium notebook or an Atom notebook.
Price AND portability both contributes to the success of a MOBILE product.
Judging by only performance and not portability is ignoring the beauty of the low-power architectures.
At $350 you can get a bulky Pentium notebook or an Atom notebook.
Price AND portability both contributes to the success of a MOBILE product.
Judging by only performance and not portability is ignoring the beauty of the low-power architectures.
After further checking, it looks like the Dell 13Z with i3-3217u has the original price of $630 at seen at the Walmart site:
http://www.walmart.com/ip/Dell-Black-13.3-Inspiron-13z-I13Z-8864SLV-Laptop-PC-with-Intel-Core-i3-3217U-Processor-and-Windows-8/22018086
Also, from comments on Newegg the Dell 13Z may have been pulled from the market because of the many problems experienced by the buyers.
Any reviewer who plays the game of system equivalence should be reminding users of this fact:
That any OEM trying to force an expensive Intel CPU into a given "low" price point can be accomplished by either sacrificing on quality of other system components OR if Intel pays, subsidizes (either above or below the table), bribes, coerces or utilizes other methods to compensate for loss of margin by the OEM.
So watch out for any reviewer on any hardware website that tries to rationalize their example of pricing "equivalent system hardware".
http://www.walmart.com/ip/Dell-Black-13.3-Inspiron-13z-I13Z-8864SLV-Laptop-PC-with-Intel-Core-i3-3217U-Processor-and-Windows-8/22018086
Also, from comments on Newegg the Dell 13Z may have been pulled from the market because of the many problems experienced by the buyers.
Any reviewer who plays the game of system equivalence should be reminding users of this fact:
That any OEM trying to force an expensive Intel CPU into a given "low" price point can be accomplished by either sacrificing on quality of other system components OR if Intel pays, subsidizes (either above or below the table), bribes, coerces or utilizes other methods to compensate for loss of margin by the OEM.
So watch out for any reviewer on any hardware website that tries to rationalize their example of pricing "equivalent system hardware".
Nintendo Maniac 64
Distinguished
- Jan 24, 2012
- 73
- 0
- 18,630
On a different note from everyone else, I think it would have been nice if Tom's compared this to some older mid-to-upper-range CPUs as well. From everything I've seen about Kabini it seems to have performance comparable to that of the lower-clocked (1.8GHz) original Phenom.
[citation][nom]slomo4sho[/nom]With Haswell around the corner claiming models with TDP of 15, 13.5, and 10 watts, the lack of performance in this chipset is discouraging to say the least.[/citation]
Yeah... The word "chipset" doesn't mean what you think it means.
Yeah... The word "chipset" doesn't mean what you think it means.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]mcx2500[/nom] Let's look at that Dell 13z which had an original list price (according to Amazon and Laptopmag) of around $600! Looking at the most recent Amazon reviews you see the user complaints: "broke in a few days" , "not working after light use", "wish that it would work"....[/citation]
I'm sorry, *none* of that is relevant. We're not comparing specific laptops, we're comparing CPUs in a price range of laptops.
There's a lot of other i3-3217U options under $450. Many ASUS models with great reviews at $400.
I'm sorry, *none* of that is relevant. We're not comparing specific laptops, we're comparing CPUs in a price range of laptops.
There's a lot of other i3-3217U options under $450. Many ASUS models with great reviews at $400.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]majorlag[/nom]Can we please stop using slower rated ram for these AMD processor reviews. The processor is rated at 1600 ddr3 ram speeds and Tom's again uses slower rated 1333 ram. [/citation]
AMD provided the ram. And it makes sense for them to do so.
Sub-$500 laptops are pretty much guaranteed to have 800 MHz DDR3.
AMD provided the ram. And it makes sense for them to do so.
Sub-$500 laptops are pretty much guaranteed to have 800 MHz DDR3.
Cleve comments:
"I'm sorry, *none* of that is relevant. We're not comparing specific laptops, we're comparing CPUs in a price range of laptops.
There's a lot of other i3-3217U options under $450. Many ASUS models with great reviews at $400."
Again, you are comparing laptops with the i3-3217u that are at the end of their cycle. For example, the Asus X202e (with i3-3217u) was put on the market last year at a price of $600. To hit that price, Asus had to use "cheap and flaky touchpad", "washed-out TN display", "miserable battery life a fraction claimed by manufacturer", "heat hitting 50-60 degrees centigrade" and so on.
It is only when reaching the clearance price of $400 (leaving the manufacturer with little or no profit unless it uses even cheaper, unreliable, shoddy components), that you find people willing to excuse the many deficits for a lower price.
Again. ECONOMICS of trying to shove an expensive Intel chip into a low priced system will manifest in lower spec components. You can choose to ignore economics just as you can choose to ignore reality.
"I'm sorry, *none* of that is relevant. We're not comparing specific laptops, we're comparing CPUs in a price range of laptops.
There's a lot of other i3-3217U options under $450. Many ASUS models with great reviews at $400."
Again, you are comparing laptops with the i3-3217u that are at the end of their cycle. For example, the Asus X202e (with i3-3217u) was put on the market last year at a price of $600. To hit that price, Asus had to use "cheap and flaky touchpad", "washed-out TN display", "miserable battery life a fraction claimed by manufacturer", "heat hitting 50-60 degrees centigrade" and so on.
It is only when reaching the clearance price of $400 (leaving the manufacturer with little or no profit unless it uses even cheaper, unreliable, shoddy components), that you find people willing to excuse the many deficits for a lower price.
Again. ECONOMICS of trying to shove an expensive Intel chip into a low priced system will manifest in lower spec components. You can choose to ignore economics just as you can choose to ignore reality.
SiliconWars
Honorable
- May 24, 2013
- 5
- 0
- 10,510
Using $630 notebooks that just happen to have 45% off their normal price is a bad joke. Let's see what price they are in a month or two, or if there are even any left on the shelves.
SiliconWars
Honorable
- May 24, 2013
- 5
- 0
- 10,510
Try to find an actual 17W TDP intel chip as well and see what the performance is like especially with throttling all the time.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]mcx2500[/nom]Again, you are comparing laptops with the i3-3217u that are at the end of their cycle. [/citation]
Not seeing the relevance. It's for sale at a similar price.
Are you suggesting that a buyer picking between a A4-5000 and an end-of-cycle Core i3-3217U should pretend that the Intel option doesn't exist because you find them inconvenient?
I can't imagine giving that advice to someone in good conscience.
Not seeing the relevance. It's for sale at a similar price.
Are you suggesting that a buyer picking between a A4-5000 and an end-of-cycle Core i3-3217U should pretend that the Intel option doesn't exist because you find them inconvenient?
I can't imagine giving that advice to someone in good conscience.
Mathos
Distinguished
- Jun 17, 2007
- 584
- 0
- 18,980
No, they told you that the laptops would likely be selling in the $300 range when they hit store shelves. Which is the same thing that was said in Anandtechs review. I can walk into walmart and find quite a few low end pentium, and atom based systems in those price ranges. Just as well as current gen Brazos based systems.
The truth is though, you can't really compare the architectures without clockspeed normalization on both cpu and gpu fronts. This would of very likely looked better at least on your end, if it were say the a6-5200 at 2ghz with the slightly faster gpu clock.
Plus like others have said, you're comparing full fledged cpu cores vs stripped down low power cores. I'd really like to see how they hold up against silvermont though.
The truth is though, you can't really compare the architectures without clockspeed normalization on both cpu and gpu fronts. This would of very likely looked better at least on your end, if it were say the a6-5200 at 2ghz with the slightly faster gpu clock.
Plus like others have said, you're comparing full fledged cpu cores vs stripped down low power cores. I'd really like to see how they hold up against silvermont though.
- May 18, 2007
- 23,812
- 5,270
- 108,890
[citation][nom]Mathos[/nom]Plus like others have said, you're comparing full fledged cpu cores vs stripped down low power cores. I'd really like to see how they hold up against silvermont though.[/citation]
What truly matters at the end of the day is not the peak maximum power or TDP but the total amount of energy consumed to get the job done. It does not much matter if an architecture is "fully fledged" or cut-down; if it does the job faster using less power in the same price segment, it wins, whatever 'it' is.
What truly matters at the end of the day is not the peak maximum power or TDP but the total amount of energy consumed to get the job done. It does not much matter if an architecture is "fully fledged" or cut-down; if it does the job faster using less power in the same price segment, it wins, whatever 'it' is.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]Mathos[/nom]No, they told you that the laptops would likely be selling in the $300 range when they hit store shelves. [/citation]
I find it amusing that you feel you have some insider information as far as what AMD told us.
I'm not sure what to say here except you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
From the Kabini laptop reviewer's guide:
"There will be numerous configurations of systems based on 2013 AMD Mainstream APU products. The system we have provided would be expected to retail for ~$499 USD including the AMD A4-5000 APU,
wide-angle 1080p eDP screen, hybrid drive (equipped in some sample units), 4GB RAM, etc. Configurations with AMD A4-5000 APU, 1366 x 768 LVDS panel, 4GB RAM, 500 GB 5400 RPM HDD would be expected to retail for ~$399 USD."
One again, as we say in the review - a Temash tablet would have been a *MUCH* better choice for AMD to send us, something that will go up against Atoms, something that probably sets a new high bar.
But a $400-$500 Kabini... not so much. 😉
I find it amusing that you feel you have some insider information as far as what AMD told us.
I'm not sure what to say here except you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
From the Kabini laptop reviewer's guide:
"There will be numerous configurations of systems based on 2013 AMD Mainstream APU products. The system we have provided would be expected to retail for ~$499 USD including the AMD A4-5000 APU,
wide-angle 1080p eDP screen, hybrid drive (equipped in some sample units), 4GB RAM, etc. Configurations with AMD A4-5000 APU, 1366 x 768 LVDS panel, 4GB RAM, 500 GB 5400 RPM HDD would be expected to retail for ~$399 USD."
One again, as we say in the review - a Temash tablet would have been a *MUCH* better choice for AMD to send us, something that will go up against Atoms, something that probably sets a new high bar.
But a $400-$500 Kabini... not so much. 😉
SiliconWars
Honorable
- May 24, 2013
- 5
- 0
- 10,510
You've served up the most negative review on the web by far Cleeve. You might want to have a look at your methods and wonder why that is.
- Mar 7, 2003
- 12,012
- 0
- 40,790
[citation][nom]SiliconWars[/nom]You've served up the most negative review on the web by far Cleeve. You might want to have a look at your methods and wonder why that is.[/citation]
That's easy. I tested a price comparable Core i3 to and a low-end Pentium to show the real-world breadth of what the A4-5000 is going up against, instead of limiting tests to cheaper products that aren't relevant competitors for this APU, such as Atoms.
Most other reviewers didn't bother. As for why, I can't speak to other reviewer's motives for the hardware they choose. Maybe they didn't check prices, maybe they couldn't get an i3-3217U laptop for testing, or maybe they were worried about angry forum posters more than they are about keeping it real.
That's easy. I tested a price comparable Core i3 to and a low-end Pentium to show the real-world breadth of what the A4-5000 is going up against, instead of limiting tests to cheaper products that aren't relevant competitors for this APU, such as Atoms.
Most other reviewers didn't bother. As for why, I can't speak to other reviewer's motives for the hardware they choose. Maybe they didn't check prices, maybe they couldn't get an i3-3217U laptop for testing, or maybe they were worried about angry forum posters more than they are about keeping it real.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News AMD says Intel's 'horrible product' is causing Ryzen 9 9800X3D shortages- Started by Admin
- Replies: 87
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
-
Question Question about DDR3 1600MHz and 1333MHz compatibility - Help with minidump files and BSOD
- Started by dimmel
- Replies: 3
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram