Intel Says CPU Prices Irrelevant in Ultrabooks

[razor512]

[citation][nom]ohim[/nom]Unlike apple their competitors don`t use cheap slaves to manufacture their computer insides ... they actually have to pay those guys. Sheesh.[/citation]


My non apple notebook PC was made the American way... by a 3 year old kid in China working a 16 hour shift.

 

[qu3becker]

For 1000$, you can get a normal laptop with the following spec:
-Intel Core i7 2630QM(2.00GHz)
-17.3"
-8GB Memory DDR3
-1TB HDD DVD±RW/CD-RW
-NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M

Screw ultrabooks, discrete gfx card are the norm, imo... At that price range.

 

[razor512]

[citation][nom]qu3becker[/nom]For 1000$, you can get a normal laptop with the following spec:-Intel Core i7 2630QM(2.00GHz) -17.3" -8GB Memory DDR3-1TB HDD DVD±RW/CD-RW-NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560MScrew ultrabooks, discrete gfx card are the norm, imo... At that price range.[/citation]

but with the normal laptop you wont get the extreme thinness and lack of ports and functionality (even though both devices will have largely the same footprint and thus if you are in a situation where you cant bring the normal laptop, you wont be able to bring the ultrabook either.

It all comes down to, do you want a laptop that will give you lots of features and performance for your money, or do you want a laptop that doesn't deliver when it comes to features and performance but is slightly thinner, allowing you to show off the systems most useful feature which is sticking the laptop into a large envelope, in order to distract yourself from the lack of features and performance.

 

[de5_Roy]

Intel Says CPU Prices Irrelevant in Ultrabooks

lies.

Intel sees pricing of ultrabooks as a major barrier for the adoption of this evolutionary notebook form factor.

because intel set cpu price too high.
in today's economy imo no one wants to buy a glorified $1000 netbook - yeah, that's what ultrabooks are - overpriced netbooks.
intel's the one whose cpus have been used in netbooks the most. they could easily design a price-performance balanced cpu for ultrabooks as they did with atom for netbooks. instead they opt for costly ulv stuff and blame the oems. what a load of bulldozer. i don't think ivy bridge will be cheap enough/reasonably priced when its released. their sh...stuff won't sell unless they're priced right, i still remember umpc, ultraportable pcs, tablet pcs.
amd's still testing water with their laptop cpus (imo llano, bobcat are very good for what they do) they could help bring ultrabook prices down only if they were capable of maintaining their schedule and production.

 

[Uberragen21]

[citation][nom]tmshdw[/nom]With Apple Air 11" at $999 so much for high-priced Apple HW rant.Same for the iPad. The Apple competitors can't meet Apple prices. Hmm....[/citation]
As an adult male, I would never touch an 11" MacBook Air (or any 11" laptop). I use a 13.3", relatively light-weight laptop, and the keyboard is still a little narrow for my liking. I couldn't use an 11" because my hands would fall all over the keyboard and cause more carpel tunnel problems than I already have.

The ultrabooks are trying to meet the $999 mark for their 13" ultrabooks, where as the MacBook Air 13" is $1299 (I know, I just bought one for my girl). Honestly, if price is that much of a concern, just wait. Prices will fall.

The original MacBook Air 13" cost $1799 (w/ a 64GB SSD), and the latest version using sandy bridge processors is $1299 (w/ a 128GB SSD). It'll be interesting to see if, and how much, the price will drop with the ivy bridge processors and whether ultrabook manufacturers can meet or beat Apple's price point.

 

[americanbrian]

People are neglecting the fact that apple owns its own OS, and can bundle it very cheaply. Intel does not own an OS and this is the second or third most expensive part of the build.

 

[Uberragen21]

[citation]Intel has reportedly revealed a reference BOM (bill of materials) without assembly costs for 21mm ultrabooks at US$475-650 and 18mm models at US$493-710, according to sources at notebook makers.[/citation]
I have yet to find a breakdown list of the BOM, but I would assume it includes all hardware and software, including the OS (though not 100% sure).

Apparently Acer already has an ultrabook out on the market for $899. It uses a hybrid HDD/SSD to reduce the cost though. Prices of SSD drives will come down, allowing full SSD ultrabooks to breach the sub $1000 mark.

 

[lordstormdragon]

"It all comes down to, do you want a laptop that will give you lots of features and performance for your money, or do you want a laptop that doesn't deliver when it comes to features and performance but is slightly thinner, allowing you to show off the systems most useful feature which is sticking the laptop into a large envelope, in order to distract yourself from the lack of features and performance."

Razor and qu3becker nailed it. There's nothing "ultra" about these laptops at all, they're just a little thinner at the cost of losing functionality. I don't even see why people care about this cabbage. If your laptop can't utilize the latest GPUs, it's just another silly fruit-based toy "computer".

For people who don't care about decent graphics performance, just get an Apple and quit your cryin'. Nobody will respect you, and you won't respect yourself, but at least you'll "fit in."

 

[eddieroolz]

Despite Intel's assertion, the OEMs do indeed consider it a major issue so Intel would be foolish to ignore this wave of complaints.

 

[jtennison]

"Intel Says CPU Prices Irrelevant in Ultrabooks"

Then I say Intel based ultrabooka are irrelevant in my life.

 

[leandrodafontoura]

I would never give up my notebook for an ultrabook, speacially cause you can put an ssd in a notebook.

 

[kaneb]

[citation][nom]soo-nah-mee[/nom]40 percent?!?!?Maybe if they sold for under $600 and became a replacement for low-end notebooks.I just don't see the need for a super-netbook in a world where tablets are becoming the media-consumption device of choice.[/citation]
They are not super-netbooks. They have the potential to be as powerful as even high-end notebooks if they use a Ivy Bridge i7 thanks to Configurable TDP. Possibly more powerful than current iterations thanks to the improvements Ivy Bridge will bring. Shrinking to 22 nm and using Tri-Gate allows them a lot of room for improvement, which is why they are calling IB a Tick+. Haswell will see this become even more true in 2013.

[citation][nom]kofz[/nom]Another pointless piece of tech, if ultrabooks want to compete with regular laptops they must have lower prices.Its everything about price.Who the hell wants a laptop less powerfull and more expensive just becasue its little thinner? Its just dumb[/citation]
See above for why they will not be less powerful.

[citation][nom]GreaseMonkey_62[/nom]What is Intel's deal? If they want an ultra book so bad want don't they figure out how to build one instead of harping on manufacturers. They want them so bad, (to sell more processors I assume) but they don't seem to be doing a whole lot to help.[/citation]
Unlike you I call investing US$300m into subsidizing their development a *lot*. Same goes with the aforementioned Configurable TDP, which will make Ultrabooks a lot more appealing as the performance trade off that exists now will be gone.

Also, Intel has said ULV will not be expensive as of IB or Haswell unlike currently. They said it will be the norm at the pricepoint of current non-ULV CPUs for IB or Haswell (sorry, not sure which). That will help prices get lower. Even their partners say IB *and* Haswell will see much cheaper Ultrabooks.