The ‘Who Wants AMD In A Laptop?’ Problem

AnandTech readers and editors have both recognized the concerns that OEMs have when using AMD products. Disregarding specific details of support provided to the device manufacturers, few of them feel the need to develop high end designs around AMD silicon due to both previously poor performance and equally poor end-user sentiment. Unfortunately for AMD, this is a somewhat deep pit to dig themselves out of, and their situation isn't helped by now skeptical OEMs. As a result, even when AMD has new designs ready for release, prominent users and OEMs alike remain reserved until independent or internal confirmation of AMD's latest claims. While the major OEMs, such as Dell, HP, Lenovo and ASUS will happily produce several models to fill the gap and maintain relationships with AMD, none of them will actively market a high-profile AMD based device due to the scope of previous AMD silicon and public expectation. If a mid-to-high end device is put in play, numbers are limited, distribution is narrow and advertising is minimal.

This was perhaps most poignant when discussing Carrizo with other media at the recent Tech Day. Other media expressed concern about the low number of laptops with AMD’s processors, noting that they are few and far between. One website owner even mentioned, anecdotally, that in his forum there is a specific section dedicated to AMD notebook owners or to-be-owners, where they track the latest models and attempt to find where it is in stock. As a result, when the members of that forum were looking for certain devices, they would have to collaborate to purchase and ship them across regional boundaries due to the limited distribution or merely the lack of access, even in North America and Europe.

Meanwhile recent comments about Carrizo from our own readers was quite telling - some associate AMD with bargain basement devices, often fitted with low grade panels at low resolutions/poor color reproducibility or poor industrial design that fails within a couple of years of use due to thermal cycling, battery degradation or device design concerns.  This condemnation of previous devices was somewhat universal, to the point where individual end users are noting how few OEMs are even taking up the mantle with AMD products. Searching in a brick and mortar shop shows a similar story - for every 10 or 20 Intel machines, they may only be a single AMD model, and that the model is a low-end budget laptop.

Despite this, OEMs should take care when deciding their future design profile. One comment from the launch of Carrizo was particularly telling - 'I would buy a Dell XPS13-esque machine with this', where the XPS13 is a halo OEM design for Intel’s Broadwell platform that received excellent reviews both for design and aesthetics. The comments on the news of Carrizo, after filtering the obvious fans of both Intel and AMD, were positive based on the information provided by AMD. However a small set of users is never sufficient to trigger OEM interest, especially when the comments of those users are based on unverified performance claims and the lack of independent testing. When an OEM looks into creating a halo type device such as the XPS13, they are reliant on both the processor manufacturer in providing an ample supply of chips with the performance they need, as well as the client market's interest in such a platform at a given price. 

No Room at the Win Benchmark Overview, and the System That Got Away
Comments Locked

175 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kylinblue - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    When I saw the sub-page title "AMD's Industry Problem" I though it is the conclusion, after reading that page I found out I am just at half of the whole article. Well done Ian, well done...
  • ImSpartacus - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    I know, right? I'm one of those weirdos that reads the pages backwards (mostly), so I was immediately surprised at the list of pages before the conclusion. I honestly haven't finished even half of the article, but it's already evident that some tlc went into it.
  • just4U - Saturday, February 6, 2016 - link

    A excellent article Ian.. and actually a surprise I wasn't expecting anything in the pipe like this right now.
  • SviatAI - Friday, February 19, 2016 - link

    Unfortunately, this often happens when you work for some ecommerce shop selling various goods, the boss of the shop may not want such kind of articles about the products he or she sells. They want it now and fast, just to fill the site with irrelevant content. The problem is that you want to make something better than a stupid re-write. But who cares? So, I am happy for those guys who write for AnandTech and other similar websites. They can learn something new while doing their job.
  • CajunArson - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    This article certainly proves one thing: When it comes to price lists on Intel Mobile parts, the numbers you see on ARK have absolutely nothing to do with the actual price that OEMs pay in real life.

    Observe the supposedly major $200 price premium for Intel chips when you read a price list in a vacuum, but then see that the real-life Intel system [with an honest-to-God *quad core* chip!] is basically selling for the exact same price as a much less capable Chorrizo part.

    I personally got a Costco-Special notebook for the wife last year at $500.. it has an I5-5200U, and I assure you that the OEM most certainly didn't sell that notebook at that price after spending $300 on the CPU.
  • extide - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    BTW, that's not a quad core. It's dual, with hyperthreading :)
  • CajunArson - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    When I said quad core I was referring to the Core i5-6300HQ (45W) in the price comparison that Anand posted. It is a 4 physical core part in a notebook that only costs $8 more than a "4 core" Carrizo using AMD's "cores".

    I am aware that the 5200U is a dual-core hyperthreaded part too. Like I said, the entire price of the notebook including the 5200U was only $500 (it has 8 GB of RAM too).
  • extide - Tuesday, March 22, 2016 - link

    Ah, yes, Intel is FINALLY shipping quad core mobile i5's. Good call :)
  • vladx - Saturday, February 6, 2016 - link

    Except you didn't put in consideration that what you bought was called "Special" for a reason and it wasn't the release price of the product that was most likely $200+ more.
  • Braincruser - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    AMD still has a long way to go before its considered a valid choice. The 4.5W intel beats it in the tasks its gonna be used in. Even in graphics, the supposed strong side of amd's APU.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now