Ultrabooks May Use Hybrid Storage to Cut Costs

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
How about allowing the storage option to be user-replacable, after all an SSD without it's metal casing would just be a PCB with a connector so you could swap out the same as with RAM chips.

Have whatever size SSD at release and a booming cottage industry for SSD upgrade cards would flourish around it.

Simples!
 
Manufactures looking to save cost should use AMD processors.

20GB is NOT enough space for a windows OS with windows update turned on and normal use.
 
[citation][nom]sonofhendrix[/nom]Manufactures looking to save cost should use AMD processors.20GB is NOT enough space for a windows OS with windows update turned on and normal use.[/citation]
Yeah, the Fusion chips are very nice! Whilst on the CPU department they don't stand a chance against the i7, in the graphics they obliterate the intel chipset. Definetely what I would prefer...

Of course, knowing that intel is behind the whole ultrabook thing, AMD might have trouble with getting companies to use their APU's
 
intel acted like an ass not reducing cpu prices for ultrabooks oems. in a few months ivy bridge comes out and sb ultrabooks will get totally outperformed by ivb. meanwhile, llano cpus can make better ultrabooks because they have better igp.
 
[citation][nom]BaronMatrix[/nom]Just don't expect Intel to do anything except raise component prices.[/citation]
That is strange it defys how ICs work. The next gen is always faster and cheaper.

When I bought a modest 486 in the 90s it cost me almost $3000 to build. Now days it costs me less than $1000 to build a decent i5 2500k rig with a 560 ti. So where is this price increase you are talking about? intel may increase proffit margins with every gen but the price per market segment has stayed about the same.
 
$999.99 is less than $1000 and you're still something with the functionality of a modern netbook.
 
Ya, I am rather confused how apple can make a cheap ultrabook, but nobody else can find the proper corners to cut. That is a sad sad day.
Perhaps they are trying too hard to put extra performance in the thing? Go for slower but larger hybrid disc solutions, use slower i3 and i5 procs instead of i5 and i7's. Get the volume and demand up on the first generation, and then let loose with the power-house machines after you get the manufacturing process and supplier costs figured out.
 


Someone should produce a Fusion based ultrabook just to stick it to Intel. Intel is the one demanding more or less from manufacturers a $1000 ultra book without being very helpful.
 
[citation][nom]xbeater[/nom]Yeah, the Fusion chips are very nice! Whilst on the CPU department they don't stand a chance against the i7, in the graphics they obliterate the intel chipset. Definetely what I would prefer...Of course, knowing that intel is behind the whole ultrabook thing, AMD might have trouble with getting companies to use their APU's[/citation]

The stronger graphics are kind of meaningless for an ultrabook...gaming is not their purpose.
 
So then Ultrabooks will become underpowered devices just like Mac Air, so whats the point of buying an slow underpowered Ultrabook if you can get a fine Mac Air that will perform on the same level?
 
So then Ultrabooks will become underpowered devices just like Mac Air, so whats the point of buying an slow underpowered Ultrabook if you can get a fine Mac Air that will perform on the same level?
Click to expand...
How is the MacBook Air underpowered? What is it underpowered for? It's not a gaming machine and it is not meant to be but I'm not sure I see your point of how its underpowered.
 
[citation][nom]halcyon[/nom]The stronger graphics are kind of meaningless for an ultrabook...gaming is not their purpose.[/citation]
And a super powerful CPU is useless as well since you won't do anything really CPU intensive either. AMD would still be better though since while heavy gaming won't be done, videos and some light gaming will and AMD CPU/GPU combo will most likely do better overall.
 
[citation][nom]jacobdrj[/nom]Not after Sales Tax/Shipping it ain't...[/citation]
You do realize that taxes and shipping are NEVER factored into the advertised price right? Just watch TV, every commercial will say ONLY $19.99 even though at the end it will cost $25-30.
 
[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]You do realize that taxes and shipping are NEVER factored into the advertised price right? Just watch TV, every commercial will say ONLY $19.99 even though at the end it will cost $25-30.[/citation]
It's 19.95
 
Camikazi:
"And a super powerful CPU is useless as well since you won't do anything really CPU intensive either. AMD would still be better though since while heavy gaming won't be done, videos and some light gaming will and AMD CPU/GPU combo will most likely do better overall."

Completely untrue. You can do a lot with a powerful CPU. Many of us will be moving to this platform for our work since it is so mobile. I'll be doing just about everything on it including engineering type tasks such as software development and testing. A strong CPU makes all the world of difference. That is why they upgrade their CPUs every year (duh).
As far as GPU goes, it is less important but still important. I don't play games on my systems and if I did, they would be lesser games. I've seen most of the gaming benchmarks and until you get to the really complicated games, the difference between current Sandy Bridge and Fusion is minimal if not negligible. I take it serious gamers will buy serious gaming rigs. Those of us who want to be ultra mobile will buy these form factors and most of those people likely aren't buying them for hard core gaming. They are likely buying them for business needs. Some of them will be travelers (whether car or airline travelers). It is the perfect form factor for them.

By the way, the new Ivy Bridge will have a significantly faster GPU and light years faster in the CPU department than what AMD is selling so it makes little sense to go with AMD. I will buy one of these when the Ivy Bridge comes out so that I get tremendous CPU performance that I can use for all of my needs while getting a graphics component that is good enough to stand on it's own against the competition.

It is kind of a no brainer. I used to use AMD but their CPUs have been barely passable lately.
 
[citation][nom]billybobser[/nom]20gb drive for OS?how many more cuts can they make.[/citation]
At least with what I've seen on the Intel Z68 chipset, the SSD is used as a cache for the hard drive. Frequently accessed files are automatically put on the ssd, otherwise the HDD is used. Seems good enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom