AMD's Vision to Make Branding Notebooks Simpler

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Easier to understand information is always better for the non-technical pc buyer, as long as it is correct and does what it says on the tin!

There are enough cases of misleading information on product out there already (vista capable anyone?) so lets hope AMD do this right
 
AMD and "Ultimate" mobile platform? What an oxymoron. AMD needs to spend more on their mobile CPU R&D and less on marketing. You won't sell much if yours fastest mobile CPU is 25-30% the speed of Intel's Quad mobile CPU.
 
The question is, will AMD be certifying these products? Or the OEMs that are building the computers? If it's the OEMs, how much can AMD enforce the standards they set out there?

I can see those being the main source of inaccuracies. I'd tend to trust something that had AMD behind the certification at this point. They have a lot more to lose by misleading people on this right now. Being the underdog (which they definitely still are compared to Intel) you can't afford the negative PR from an apparent attempt to mislead the consumer.
 
[citation][nom]moricon[/nom]Easier to understand information is always better for the non-technical pc buyer, as long as it is correct and does what it says on the tin!There are enough cases of misleading information on product out there already (vista capable anyone?) so lets hope AMD do this right[/citation]
According to the chart, the "Ultimate" systems use less power ("Long Active Battery Life") than the basic ones. If anything, they just have more battery cells. Using the same battery, though, better graphics cards typically use more power. Seems rather misleading... =/
 
Too much marketing with little results... Too many fancy statements but with few good products.

AMD is a minority in the notebook business.

AMD is a none-entity in the netbook business.
 
[citation][nom]supertrek32[/nom]According to the chart, the "Ultimate" systems use less power ("Long Active Battery Life") than the basic ones. If anything, they just have more battery cells. Using the same battery, though, better graphics cards typically use more power. Seems rather misleading... =/[/citation]

Your right, they can't honestly tell consumers that gaming laptops have good battery life.
 
"Your right, they can't honestly tell consumers that gaming laptops have good battery life. "


No, you're both wrong. You're saying that surfing the internet on a slower machine vs. gaming on a high-end laptop is an apples-to-apples comparison, and it's not. The battery might drain even faster on the basic laptop if you actually tried to game on it, whereas the high-end might have more performance per watt and a bigger battery, so superior battery life when doing the same activities. I hope AMD's marketing department thought this out more than you guys just did.
 
Its funny to hear AMD say that users care less about specs and more about real life performance. Not to long ago, AMD dismissed Intel's first Quads as not being "true" quads because of their architecture.

But anyways, I hope this marketing works for them. I would like to see them become more equal with Intel. Intel is starting to get to the point where they can charge whatever prices they want with Laptop CPU's
 
I find it odd that AMD, who champions low power consumption ever since the Athlon 64 has fallen so far behind in price/performance in mobile processors. The Dragon platform isn't bad, but the weak link is either the heat produced from the chipset or the CPU or both, and causes horrible battery life. I don't need to render CGI, I just want to watch hulu full screen without being choppy...
 
[citation][nom]cloakster[/nom]Your right, they can't honestly tell consumers that gaming laptops have good battery life.[/citation]
I don't think they're 'gaming' laptops.
 
[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]AMD and "Ultimate" mobile platform? What an oxymoron. AMD needs to spend more on their mobile CPU R&D and less on marketing. You won't sell much if yours fastest mobile CPU is 25-30% the speed of Intel's Quad mobile CPU.[/citation]

Well, yes and no. It was their poor marketing that killed AMD when they had the better products pre-Core 2. So I am glad they are marketing. But yeah, their mobile platform leaves something to be desired on their 2+ ghz dual cores, even with Dragon.
 
Is it really necessary to do this?
We know AMD's graphics card can do just about anything in 1280x800 or similar resolution. Gaming, video,...
Most people use something like 1600x1024 monitors at most, or go for a dual monitor setup.

Generally the users who don't know anything about computers are also the ones who don't need to know anything about the insides! They mail, work in office, and occasionally want to watch a bluetooth movie, which works on any computer with bluetooth save some atom or ARM powered netbooks.

The gamer will be aware of what he needs, as well as the professional who needs a card for 3D rendering, or encoding. Their knowledge far surpasses these basic charts, so the question is:
"For who did they create this chart?"
 
[citation][nom]ProDigit80[/nom]Is it really necessary to do this?We know AMD's graphics card can do just about anything in 1280x800 or similar resolution. Gaming, video,...Most people use something like 1600x1024 monitors at most, or go for a dual monitor setup.Generally the users who don't know anything about computers are also the ones who don't need to know anything about the insides! They mail, work in office, and occasionally want to watch a bluetooth movie, which works on any computer with bluetooth save some atom or ARM powered netbooks.The gamer will be aware of what he needs, as well as the professional who needs a card for 3D rendering, or encoding. Their knowledge far surpasses these basic charts, so the question is:"For who did they create this chart?"[/citation]

I don't think I know anybody that uses 1600x1024 😛
 
AMD Vision brand is preparing for the launch of AMD Tigris platform, which consists of RS880M chipset, ATi HD 4200 integrated graphics, Turion II and possibly Athlon II processors based on K10.5 core. The performance should be on par with Intel's mobile Core 2 Duo lines of similar clock speed.

Laptop buying is not like desktop buying. Speed is not everything. If AMD can somehow make the chips so that a decent enough CPU with HD4200 can be packed into 13" laptop, they'll have a winner.

 
It's not really gimmicky, now is it? This branding is not aimed at people who read tomshardware, it's aimed at parents who are clueless about tech, and buying a laptop for their kids. It's all about setting the proper expectation of what the laptop can do when you get it home, and I believe this is a good initiative for helping non-techies(ie: not us) make informed buying decisions. Intel laptops with an IGP are graphically challenged, so AMD do have the edge here.
 
So how do users compare a system they want to upgrade to in the future with one they bought today when there are no more "tech specs"?
Maybe we should just stop dumbing things down in America. People could do the research or talk to "the average Toms hardware reader". Or just accept the responsibility for not knowing what they are getting.

Hope they don't take away the information on the packaging for those of us who know.
 
whydoouneedmyname: Why on earth would you think that AMD would prevent users from knowing specs? Are they going to remove the ability to view system specs in the BIOS and Control Panel to? That's just ridiculous, what they're doing is setting a proper expectation of what it can do, not making people who don't want to be techies have to figure out what the necessary specs would be to do what they want to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom