Why does everybody believes a APU should be paired with a weak dGPU?

Look through the large amount of offers of thin-and-light notebooks and I've found it difficult to get a AMD APU notebook without a dGPU, while iGPU-only Intel CPU models are all over the place. Why do those people Cross-Fire accelerate the already faster AMD iGPU while leaving the slower Intel non-Iris-Pro iGPU working hard on its own?

 

I'd guess a lot of it has to do with marketing and perception.

 

its a problem regarding what companies thinking we want. they throw at us that trash and at least I look and say meh

a dgpu less amd 13" with a high quality body, good screen, for 800 bucks is not only possible, but its a necessity

 

Samsung was so close with the Series 9 Lite, but then put in an A4-1450 (instead of an A8 or A10) and a horrible screen. Sad.

 

Do we even have one highly portable A10 model without a dGPU? Can somebody name one?

 

I consider my 6475b to be the best portable AMD dGPU-less notebook to date. Sad indeed. Otherwise, no it simply doesn't exist.

Maybe the U38N or Vizio 14" thin and light?

Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2

 

yep. even a 15 like the ux51 should do fine, though I would go and put a dgpu in it (the 8870m should fit the bill nicely), it can cope with that heat or so I believe that asus can't screw up on the zenbook line so many times, against them they have the N series which is always a pos.

the amd cpus, don't fill my needs, but I can't stop thinking that a good notebook can't fill that niche of thin and light with quality with an amd cpu. Though I will say that Im not particularly a nut case for thin, but people like that, I want them to be light, as light as possible with enough power to do our tasks.

the u38n doesn't fit the bill either.

so in the end amd cpus are still paired with some form of gimped thing, chassis, cooling, weight, quality, screen, the power of the cpu itself, and sometimes the price.

 

I had massive faith and excitement about AMD's products. The A10 chips were powerful enough for pretty much any daily task and the iGPU was perfectly fine for gaming if you sacrificed some resolution and/or details. But what I lost faith in are the OEM's. They do keep gimping machines, and AMD machines especially, by offering lower clocked APU's than what the system could easily accommodate. I'm still waiting for a top end AMD APU with an iGPU that doesn't throttle, and in a 13" 0.75 inch thick, 3.5 lbs form factor with 1080p screen, dual mSATA, and two RAM slots, all for < $800.

 

bah! no one wants that! oh wait...

 

That's it! I guess i have to do it.

I'm launching my new company that manufactures and sells custom AMD laptops people actually want. I'll cater to those the OEMs have chosen to ignore. Here's what I'll be offering.

All notebooks come standard with

Quad core (dual core optional) APUs, dGPU optional by model size

IPS "accurate color" 1080p+ displays, touch and finish optional

Backlit tactile keyboards with point stick and physical mouse buttons with apple like responsive touchpad

Dual band 3x3 802.11ac, BT (with DUN) and WWAN capabilities

Dual mSATA III with optional RAID w/ TRIM support

Dual sodimm slots 1866+ memory on Richland models

Most models will include docking ports, minimum 2 USB 3.0 ports, miniDP w/ USB 3.0, eSATAp w/ USB 3.0, PCIe multi card reader, ExpressCard 54mm 2nd gen.,

Fingerprint scanner, 10MP rear cam/ 5MP front cam, dual mics, separate mic and headphone ports, optional cd dvd writer for bigger models, secondary batteries,

Notebook size and performance class:
10.1" Temash
11.6" Temash/ Kabini
12.5" Kabini
13.3" Kabini/ Richland
14.0" Richland
15.6" Richland

Cost: $250-$1700 depending on your configuration and model


I'll add more later. This should just about do it. Let me know how many i can put you down for!

Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2

 

Almost perfect. Just add a secondary mini card slot for optional 3G/GPS.

But double camera? I believe most people are more interested in a GOOD camera. Not only the **MP blah blah, but a special housing that stand out from the screen panel, which is capable of holding a much larger camera instead of a pinhole. I'm not sure how easy it would be to get the necessary supply though.

The primary feature of the MacBook touch pad is not "high responsiveness", but good integration with Mac OS GUI. This is something a manufacturer can't achieve on its own when making Windows/Linux computers. (Except for Win 8 ported apps or maybe a special netbook distro.)

+1

 

For me would be

11.1", 13.3" and 15" models

IPS panels on all models, with 3x USB3, mDP, HDMI, ethernet, along with finger print reader, 2x pcie SSDs (m2/ngff) and a card reader, camera is whatever is decent

only the 15" would have a dgpu and it would be a 8870m, all would be in the thin and light and only the 11" would have a kabini cpu. All would have 2x SOdimm slots

chassis would be aluminum or magnesium, starting price would be 650 (11"), 800 (13), 1k (15), all come with 128gb of storage and 1x 4gb of 1866 ram, storage of up to 1tb of sheer SSD power

all the richlands will use the a10 5750m

with that I can actually decrease costs and give a good product. btw that is thoroughly possible to make and the prices should be real, with a profit margin of 5-15% in the base model

 

And a battery large enough to get 6-8 hours.

 

The HP ENVY 15z-j000 pretty well configurable at HP website, up to 1080p HD screen, backlit keyboard, A8-5550M or A10-5750M with optional Radeon 8750M! or the MSI GX60, I'll probably try to get an used one for very cheap with the old A10 just for fun...

 

17" desired here. I need the extra space for video editing.

 

Screen pixel size can be same whether 13" or 17". 1920x1080 can be found in 12" to 17" notebooks, so unless you just want a larger screen, no real reason.

 

But if the pixel density gets too high, you can't see the details effectively.

 

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but ok.

 

I should put some more security tech, like TPM and other virtualisation techs from AMD, so that it can be effectively used as a prosummer device

and the battery life as HT mentioned

Im not overly enthusiastic in putting a very high dpi display on the notebooks because of price. I can put a bunch of stuff, some make believe, and claim that I can get a profit of it, I won't, nor it will be a real product

 

I know people who run 14" 1600x900 displays at 125% DPI because stuff is too small for them otherwise. Some people prefer having more physical real estate for the same amount of pixels. Think of ti this way: each pixel is bigger the larger the monitor for the same resolution, so a difference in a single pixel can be easier to spot on a larger display.

Some people can see things at very high PPI without any problems, others can't...

 

It still doesn't make sense because you can just scale most things (text, interface, any thing vector). The only thin that suffers any clarity is when you are rendering bitmaps to a resolution that isn't a mutliple of a power of two, it rendering 1280x720 on 1920x1080 it becomes blurred as each input pixel corresponds to 1.5x1.5 output pixels. So, if you have bad eyes and look at memes with small text all day, you're going to have a bad time I guess. But for anything else, you're going to benefit tremendously in clarity.

 

Do you want to work with a 4" 1080p phone+wireless-keyboard/mouse setup, assuming that it has enough possessing power?

 

Sure if it has a DP or HDMI connection.

 

It'd certainly be better than a 4" 480x270 screen. But yeah, seeing your original post bigger screens are better for video work but I still think you should always strive toward maximum DPI. My argument isn't against big screens, but rather low DPI (and low resolution bitmaps/videos).

 

I generally prefer higher dpi screens as it makes things look sharper and you can usually scale things up in size if they are too small without losing quality.

Gaming on weaker laptops is the only time I'm willing to make an exception for lower dpi screens; with a weaker laptop you'll probably need to lower resolution to get playable frame rates, and generally games look best at the screens native resolution.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

 

Will your laptops offer 16:10 screens, Karamazovmm? If so, sign me up. Oh, and you can spare the front camera; I plan to use it as a laptop rather than a tablet.

Really, though, I'd like to see more thin-and-light laptops offer AMD processors and have the option of just using the integrated, not-actually-that-bad iGPU. To me that may well be a better option than an Intel laptop with HD Graphics.

 

let me get a deal with apple suppliers for that 16:10, though it will be retina, not the ones in the current cmbp, the 11" should have 16:9, since there are no 16:10 screens out there for 11" with high res

 

Do 4:3 13~15" screens even exist these days?

 

not as far as Im aware

 

Actually with the higher DPI, games tend to scale well to 720p from 1080p with little to no loss in fidelity. Case in point, 13" 1080p screen running games at 720p:

Bioshock Infinite: w230st bioshock infinite 1080p 720p - YouTube
Dirt 3: w230st dirt 3 1080p 720p - YouTube
Metro Last Light: w230st metro last light 1080p 720p - YouTube
Tomb Raider: w230st tomb raider 1080p 720p - YouTube

 

I'm not arguing that they don't look well scaled down, just that they look better at native resolution; I tried playing games at 720p on my Asus g53sw 1080p display, and while it still looks pretty good, you will notice that 1080p looks even better.

Cost is also another factor; low resolution displays are cheaper to manufacture, and when you're talking about budget laptops the cost difference between a 720p and a 1080p display can easily increase the cost of the laptop by 25% (I'm assuming a 1080p display would command about a $100 premium over a 720p display).

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4

 

"Why does everybody believes a APU should be paired with a weak dGPU?"

Because the MSI GX60 proved (as we already had guessed it) that a top-of-the-line APU and a top-of-the-line dGPU isn't such a great combo either.

This could've been remedied by AMD by releasing a mobile Black Edition fully unlocked 45W TDP APU.

 

doesn't matter, it won't compete in IPC with intel quads anytime soon, what they need to do is make more powerful cpus

 

It matters a lot! You kidding me right?

AMD needs to improve on a lot of things no doubt but realistically they're a much smaller company with less financial backing and overall capacity.

Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2

 

I was not asking "why not a fast dGPU", but "why not no dGPU at all".

 

Im not kidding you, clocks can only do so much