Heading to BestBuy now to check it out as they have the 13inch in stock - $849 for 2700u with 256gb ssd and 12gb ram (8+4, so 8gb operates in dual channel and 4 in single). 3.8lbs and .7" thick, so true mobility. I'll compare to my surfacebook one, which is a 6600u and 945mx, 3.5lbs and .9".
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Dell kneecapping AMD
- Thread starter Uvaman2
- Start date
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
Formula.350
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,102
"12GB, DDR4, 2400MHz; up to 16GB (additional memory sold separately)"
*raises eyebrow*
I hope it's "12GB usable" because 4GB is being allotted to the IGP
That or it has 8GB soldered to the board and a 4GB stick tossed in for good measure :\"12GB, DDR4, 2400MHz; up to 16GB (additional memory sold separately)"
*raises eyebrow*
I hope it's "12GB usable" because 4GB is being allotted to the IGP
It's got an 8gb stick and a 4gb stick, so up to 8gb operates in dual channel, above that operates in single channel. I'll probably grab an 8gb sodimm to pop in for the full 16gb.
D
Deleted member 184142
Guest
AMD sued Intel in the US, then dropped the case when they could not prove anything and were going to lose. After dropping the case, they reported them to get the government to investigate.....No one wanted to push it after their first findings as there was not much to base anything on. However there was a new head looking to run for governor who needed a rally cry and picked Intel, the lead investigator stated this was stupid and there was no data up back it up, after getting elected he then dropped the Intel bashing. AMD also reported Intel to the EC in the EU, which had a LONG investigation to which the official report for stated that Intel did no damages to AMD sales and that rebates Intel offered did not break any laws and AMD offered the same sort of rebates as well. After the official investigation team for the EC gave it's report, the EC STILL fined Intel because it wanted to, not because of any guilt found, as the EC does not have the same standards of guilt as a court of law. The EC was then hammered by the Ombudsman for procedural errors and maladministration for the case with Intel where they purposefully did not record meetings with Dell and others who testified, they first denied they ever took place and once backed into a corner by proof intel had, stated that they did take place but had no requirements to record the meetings. Mostly because the statements and information given didn't back up the EC's stand point of wanting to fine Intel. Funny enough, Neelie Kroes is also being investigated for links to offshore companies in the Bahamas that she did not report and was in directorship position of at least one at the time of her posting in the EC, which is against it's ethics rules. Not to mention she was recruited by the UAE RIGHT at the time the UAE became a large investor in AMD and just so happen to be around the time she went back after Intel....Keep in mind before her posting to the EC in 2002 the EC ruled the complaints against Intel were unfounded.
Gideon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2006
- Messages
- 3,557
AMD didnt drop the case against Intel in the US, they simply settled for 1.25 billion in cash and some agreements on patents and AMD was allowed to divest itself of fabs. The EU has fined Intel and Intel last I heard was still in a appeal of that case. The rest you posted is opinion and without facts. https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-to-pay-amd-1-25-billion-in-antitrust-settlement/
Ironic, when I am asking some posters to sustain their posts with facts, since the first page of this thread. Still awaiting for facts...
Gideon is correct, with or without links to prove it.
That wasn't my point. Independently of if Gideon is right or not (I didn't say anything about that). It continues being ironic that proofs and links are always required in one way only.
OrangeKhrush
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,673
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
I'm not sure if Gideon has a twitter account which says he is right, yet ?
Gideon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2006
- Messages
- 3,557
Oh, I get why you asked. I, too, tire of the endless double-standard on display. However, he (I'm assuming a he) is correct and it's enough established history that I don't believe it necessary to display, or demand, proof.
Also ironic are the tooth-gnashing when a link is provided. All of a sudden, it's not proof required, but proof from only 'approved by me' sources.
Seems that Dell learned from their mistakes with the 17 as the 13 and 15 are much better. The only issue I can see with the 15 is that screen isn't stellar, the 13 is so good overall that I went and bought one. Bonus is that the bios had tons of options including memory speed, tdp, custom fan profiles etc. The 13 may be the best ryzen laptop released so far.
Formula.350
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,102
Very glad to hear that it has two physical DDR4 slots. Wish I had the money to plop down to get rid of this ENVY 360; however, it'd be nice to have a 2-in-1 again, and that's only offered in 13in by Dell. So I guess it's fine that I'm unable to get one anyways
And you ignore again that I am not talking about if he is correct or not, but mentioning the irony behind he soliciting proofs and links about comments made about Intel AMD litigations, but he doesn't asking for a single link or proof to anyone in this thread making accusations against Dell.
Still awaiting for those making accusations against Dell to provide proofs. Still awaiting this people to answer questions in #12.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
#Define Irony
I imagine this is what Juan is talking about, made it nice and easy to see since going back and re-reading posts is a pain. As I said, at least I don't know how much AMD charges for a non-consumer level part. Not that it matters though for most peoples needs, it's not like we determine if an automobile is worth it because of the wholesale cost of a piston. I really don't care what Dell pays for their AMD U APUs, much as I don't care how much they pay for their screens or keycaps or any other piece of a laptop/computer. All in all, it also has little to do with how much they charge for said laptop, how much they can charge is actually determined on what people will pay for said item.
Formula.350
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,102
How about we just chalk it up to Dell wanting to recuperate their cost of development on the AMD motherboard since they know they will sell less volume of them due to the uninformed-populous' impressions of AMD [see: not a 'household name' like Intel] and as such have opted to charge a higher price for a similarly configured system.
However, of interested, I was on Dell's site just now and went through all the Inspiron systems in all screen sizes (except 11inch), 2-in-1 and conventional, from both AMD and Intel and none of them showed to have SSD+HDD anymore. The only trump-card that the Intel models had when it came to the HDD was 2TB vs the 1TB on AMD configs. BUT the Intel ones seemed to often come default in Single Channel compared to AMD's... or at least the Intel models specified that they were in Single Channel, so who knows... The AMD ones often had a max of 32GB, but NEITHER the 8GB or 16GB installed configurations stated whether it was Single or Dual Channel :\
To me this is slightly concerning because that would seem to imply that either Dell is not specifying that on AMD's systems, period, or that the 8GB models are using 2x4GB sticks... Frankly, with the number of systems they build, I have a hard time believing they would even be bothering with any 4GB DDR4 2400MHz modules when on Intel models they would rather install a single 8GB module.
Furthermore, we can see that the 2700U has a maximum support of up to 32GB... so this makes it rather curious when it comes to those 13in 2-in-1 where their max is half that, something I didn't really notice in my earlier post. It's almost like what happens when they remove one memory slot from a motherboard in favor of some on-board soldered DRAM ICs [/s]
I think it's important to point out that the components and materials used between an Intel and AMD system are basically 90% the same, and so the majority of costs come down to the CPU and "Southbridge". Well and also how fleshed out a motherboard they've decided to make between them. For example if one has an MXM slot, or more mPCIe ports, m.2, etc. But I don't see that as driving costs up too much.
Point is, that unless Intel is listing their CPU price as one amount ($130 or whatever the article had quoted from Intel's Ark page) and selling it to the companies at a 75% discount, there's really no way that AMD is selling their chips at a price to make up that difference.
I do think part of it comes down to what I had said above, that they're mitigating loss on development, but otherwise the cost of everything else is going to be shared between the configs.
However, of interested, I was on Dell's site just now and went through all the Inspiron systems in all screen sizes (except 11inch), 2-in-1 and conventional, from both AMD and Intel and none of them showed to have SSD+HDD anymore. The only trump-card that the Intel models had when it came to the HDD was 2TB vs the 1TB on AMD configs. BUT the Intel ones seemed to often come default in Single Channel compared to AMD's... or at least the Intel models specified that they were in Single Channel, so who knows... The AMD ones often had a max of 32GB, but NEITHER the 8GB or 16GB installed configurations stated whether it was Single or Dual Channel :\
To me this is slightly concerning because that would seem to imply that either Dell is not specifying that on AMD's systems, period, or that the 8GB models are using 2x4GB sticks... Frankly, with the number of systems they build, I have a hard time believing they would even be bothering with any 4GB DDR4 2400MHz modules when on Intel models they would rather install a single 8GB module.
Furthermore, we can see that the 2700U has a maximum support of up to 32GB... so this makes it rather curious when it comes to those 13in 2-in-1 where their max is half that, something I didn't really notice in my earlier post. It's almost like what happens when they remove one memory slot from a motherboard in favor of some on-board soldered DRAM ICs
[/s]I think it's important to point out that the components and materials used between an Intel and AMD system are basically 90% the same, and so the majority of costs come down to the CPU and "Southbridge". Well and also how fleshed out a motherboard they've decided to make between them. For example if one has an MXM slot, or more mPCIe ports, m.2, etc. But I don't see that as driving costs up too much.
Point is, that unless Intel is listing their CPU price as one amount ($130 or whatever the article had quoted from Intel's Ark page) and selling it to the companies at a 75% discount, there's really no way that AMD is selling their chips at a price to make up that difference.
I do think part of it comes down to what I had said above, that they're mitigating loss on development, but otherwise the cost of everything else is going to be shared between the configs.
How about we just chalk it up to Dell wanting to recuperate their cost of development on the AMD motherboard since they know they will sell less volume of them due to the uninformed-populous' impressions of AMD [see: not a 'household name' like Intel] and as such have opted to charge a higher price for a similarly configured system.
However, of interested, I was on Dell's site just now and went through all the Inspiron systems in all screen sizes (except 11inch), 2-in-1 and conventional, from both AMD and Intel and none of them showed to have SSD+HDD anymore. The only trump-card that the Intel models had when it came to the HDD was 2TB vs the 1TB on AMD configs. BUT the Intel ones seemed to often come default in Single Channel compared to AMD's... or at least the Intel models specified that they were in Single Channel, so who knows... The AMD ones often had a max of 32GB, but NEITHER the 8GB or 16GB installed configurations stated whether it was Single or Dual Channel :\
To me this is slightly concerning because that would seem to imply that either Dell is not specifying that on AMD's systems, period, or that the 8GB models are using 2x4GB sticks... Frankly, with the number of systems they build, I have a hard time believing they would even be bothering with any 4GB DDR4 2400MHz modules when on Intel models they would rather install a single 8GB module.
Furthermore, we can see that the 2700U has a maximum support of up to 32GB... so this makes it rather curious when it comes to those 13in 2-in-1 where their max is half that, something I didn't really notice in my earlier post. It's almost like what happens when they remove one memory slot from a motherboard in favor of some on-board soldered DRAM ICs
I think it's important to point out that the components and materials used between an Intel and AMD system are basically 90% the same, and so the majority of costs come down to the CPU and "Southbridge". Well and also how fleshed out a motherboard they've decided to make between them. For example if one has an MXM slot, or more mPCIe ports, m.2, etc. But I don't see that as driving costs up too much.
Point is, that unless Intel is listing their CPU price as one amount ($130 or whatever the article had quoted from Intel's Ark page) and selling it to the companies at a 75% discount, there's really no way that AMD is selling their chips at a price to make up that difference.
I do think part of it comes down to what I had said above, that they're mitigating loss on development, but otherwise the cost of everything else is going to be shared between the configs.
The amd's are all dual channel as verified by users and service manual. If you factor in the gpu on the amds, they're a good value compared to the Intel versions, except for the oddly configured 17"models.
pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 52,193
the sale ended
I suppose that "pain" to read what was written is the reason why you once again ignore the point of the discussion, and repeat arguments you used in #13 and I replied in #15.