dv6se with AMD processors out at HP

I don't know if this has been said already but I just noticed that the new dv6 with the updated AMD processors are available at HP and they are very good value. I just configured one with,

AMD Phenom II N830 Triple Core processor at 2.1GHz
4GB DDR3
320GB 7200RPM
1GB ATI 5650 (switchable)

for $875. The select edition also has the touchscreen option available and comes standard with AMD Turion II dual core P520 at 2.3GHz and ATI 5470 for $650.

The dm3z has also been refreshed with up to AMD Turion II Neo dual core K625 at 1.5GHz and ATI 5430. I wish that these had been out when they did the 25% BCB, could have gotten the dv6z for $700 and the dm3z with Turion II Neo dual-core K625/ATI 5430 plus an external optical drive for $600.

 

nice machine, i just wish the res was higher

 

This.

Why is EVERY sub-17" HP laptop stuck with worthless 1366x768 LCDs unless it's an ENVY?!

 

I wonder how those new amd chips perform?

the phenom II dual core version is clocked at 2.8 GHz, wonder what intel it competes with, i3?

 

Sadly, the Phenom II probably competes with the Core 2 Duo.

 

I'm guessing the dual cores probably perform about the same as their similarly clocked C2D counterparts and the triple cores compete with the i3 and low-end i5. Not bad for the price when most people don't need that kind of power anyway.

 

That would be surprising, I know clock for clock the new intels will blow it out of the water, but the base i3 chip is only clocked at 2.13 GHz, that dual core phenom II has a 2.8 GHz clock speed.

I would think with such a leap in brute clock speed some parity should be attained.

 

Hmm, well, I didn't see the huge increase in clockspeed, but the Phenom II X4 is ~60% slower than the i7 QM at similar clockspeed according to an old Anandtech article.
AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

I don't think they did a performance review of the X2 but I guess it'd be reasonable to hope the Phenom II X2 2.8GHz would compete with the i3...

 

I think AMD is more of a budget chip when it comes to HP. not to mention they r still falling far below standard set by intel with the core i3, i5 and i7. i think the have something called hyper transport but it not as good as hyper threading. then there is the lack of some form of turboboost. lastly its the manufacturing process and heat/energy efficiency. the only thing keeping amd afloat right now is there desktop sector and the low price of there notebook chips.

 

Damn this is gay, I just noticed HP doesn't sell AMD-based Pavilions in Hong Kong. And I was getting all hyped about the great specs and low price.

 

Hypertransport is a interconnect used by AMD to replace the FSB. Hyperthreading is a technology developed by Intel to improve parallelization on their cpus. IE: HT, fools the OS to think that it's a dual core cpu when there is only one core. They are completely different technologies and can't be compared to each other. For turboboost, only i5 and i7 cpus support that.

AMD cpus are competing against i3 and low tier i5 Intel chips. Your average user won't even use these chips to their full capacity.

If you're a gamer,the bottle neck will almost always be the videocard. You need to get a good videocard first then a decent cpu.

If you're doing heavy multitasking or encoding then it's debatable weather 3 real cores are better than 2 hyper-threaded ones.

If you just want pure performance, then pay the Intel tax to get a high end i5 or i7 and call it a day.

 

I remember back when amd first released their 64 bit dual core athlons that kicked the intel chips . No hyperthreading back then from the amd chips, but intel only had single core chips at the start, and a faked dual (hyperthreaded) core was no match for two actual physical cores.

Looks like the previous gimmick in the face of hard performance is paying off more now. But if they ever reached similar performance clock for clock, I would find it hard to believe an extra physical core would be outmatched by hyperthreading. But I am a pure lay person on this and have no idea what the chip logistics are.

 

I should've stated that i wasnt really sure what hypertransport is... and im not an intel fanboy im just saying that right now intel is better. i would love to see amd come out with a faster more efficiant chip than intel. that runs cooler. lastly the major point of my post which, i admit, i failed to drive home was that HP gives better options and discounts for its intel laptops than their amd laptops. for example the free upgrade to blu-ray that HP has going right now. if u bought an AMD laptop and u wanted blu-ray then u would end up paying $150 extra for it, so if ur building a laptop and u want blu-ray then u end up paying more for the laptop over all (until the discount ends of course). furthermore normally they have better discounts on computer components such as ram etc.

now just to be clear before i fail again, the major point of this post is I AM NOT TRYING TO START AN INTEL VS AMD DISCUSION/ARGUMENT im only stating facts

My 2 cents

 

Can anyone inform me if there is anything really different between AMD's new chips and the i3/i5 series? Is there anything the AMD chips have over the Intel ones like less power consumption, better performance, etc? I don't know much about AMDs new chips.

 

Well, they are different in how they are designed and manufactured but overall the i3/i5's should have the leg up on most of the AMD processors. However, the AMD's generally tend to be cheaper and paired with slightly better IGP's (ATi4200 vs the Intel HD). Most people wont be able to tell the difference if it wasnt for the sticker on top of the laptop in terms of performance.

 

If you can google the new amd chips benchmarked better then the core 2 duo's but are less powerful then the ix series

 

I agree. It's so chink. But, what can a guy do. In a perfect world every laptop wold come with a lifetime supply of beer.

 

Quad core Phenom II processors are now an option for customization. Quad core and switchable 5650 for around $900 (after BCB). Damn

 

If it wasn't for the crappy resolution I might have bought one by now.

 

how do amd's quads perform against intel's i7s?

actually its their graphics counterpart ATI which is destroying nvidia on the desktop market (5XXX) and soon to be on the mobile market. (no bias here guys )

 

The current AMD mobile quads N930 (35 Watts) and P920 (25 Watts) can't match the i7 in performance though they are cheaper and use less power. They are going against the i5 and i3 respectively.

 

I just posted this info over on [H]ardforums with my tests on a couple of the new chips from cinebench 11.5,, included two intel machine results for comparison with the i3/i5



Seeing as that no one/site has any benchmarks up for ANY of the new amd chips I decided to do some myself.

I tested 4 laptops at costco on the cpu test for cinebench 11.5

[/begin rant - since the internet is a FAILURE with no one doing any benchmarks on chips that are in the public freaking space. What the hell is the point of benchmarking websites if not to do freaking benchmarks??? /end rant]

I wanted to get results for the newer pc mark vantage, and downloaded all 600+ MB to put on the notebooks, but an internet connection is needed after the install to fetch the trial registration code (just lovely futuremark guys, really classy, rendered a remote test useless before it started.)

Anyway, here are the cinebench results

intel i3 (dual 2.13) = 1.76
intel i5 (dual 2.26) = 2.09
amd phenom II n620 (dual 2.8) = 1.6
amd phenom II n930 (quad 2.0) = 2.27



Two of the newer HP notebooks they recently put out in the costco stores had newer amd chips and I was really curious to see if the n620 was a match for i3 seeing as that the clocks were so drastically higher, a brute force approach to speed increases, its not an embarrassment, but the i3 still takes a decent lead, less than the difference between it and the i5, but not as close as I would have hoped for amd. Still, for normal usage, it is a decent option if the price is right, it is not a terrible chip.


the n930 scored the highest, but then it was the only one with 4 physical cores, even if it only had 1 thread per core. So for heavier multithreaded performance on the cheap, it should be a decent option... unless there is some massive thing I am missing (easily plausible as I am a complete layman, which is why benchmarking sites ought to be doing this work !!!!!!!!!!!


One note, before running the test I set the power profile on each notebook to high performance while they were all plugged in.

 

Nice work on the benchmarks!

I am considering the AMD P920 quad core but was wondering how that would affect battery life since the i5 CPUs are more power efficient.

There is also the P920 AMD quad that's a 25Watt chip which is more power efficient but it runs at a slower 1.6 ghz. It would be nice to get benchmarks on that as well.

If anyone has any info on those topics, that would be great.

 

Looks like they changed the customization options on the dv6z. Now you can only get the AMD quads with the Select Edition. Glad I ordered for my brother already because he wanted the metal finish and backlit keyboard on the Select Edition but didn't need a quad-core processor.