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

  • jabber - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    You'd think someone was paying the OEMs to hamstring these machines...

    Some odd facepalm design decisions there.
  • CajunArson - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Somebody *IS* paying OEMs to hamstring the machines: Customers. Customers who want cheap products that is.

    AMD makes its reputation as: "Intel is too expensive! We're cheap!" Don't act all shocked and surprised when the rest of the components in the system end up being the cheap components too.

    As Anand just pointed out with that price comparison, even with all the cheaping out you can still see a whopping $8 price advantage for AMD on comparably configured notebooks.
  • tipoo - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Seriously, some weird stuff. No dual graphics when the chips are almost the same performance? Single channel RAM? What the hell.
  • Midwayman - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    I feel like AMD needs to pull a MS surface or Nexus and put out a reference model to show OEMs how it is supposed to be done. If all OEMs will do is put out a half assed effort, at least then they can just copy the reference design and it will work well.
  • bojblaz - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    +1... You're right, OEMs have pissed off MS and Google enough for them to go solo. AMD could totally follow suit
  • InquisitorDavid - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Sure, if they had the money to. As it stands, the company is now banking on Zen to rescue them. I don't think they can afford to invest in going solo with device designs, at least not right now.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link

    They could team up with the likes of MSI or Clevo. Both have done good AMD laptops in the past.

    A 14 inch msi laptop with a 100wh battery, a 8800p, and 8gb dual channel ram would fetch a good price from those who want AMD laptops.
  • 0razor1 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Attn Ed: The HP Elitebook 745 G2
    GCN 1.0 in the text and then 1.1 in the grid.
    Nice read BTW.
  • Ian Cutress - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Fixed! Thanks :)
  • RationalHaterade - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Great write-up, Ian. This is enlightening, and the buoyant attitude at AMD might be saying a lot about what we can expect to see from the 2016/17 product releases.

    Speaking to Carrizo, I'm not sure they realized how badly they were hurting themselves when they elected to keep Kabini/Temash as single-channel designs and then provide OEMs a cheap out by making it pin-compatible with the big architecture. GCN has always been very bandwidth-dependent in every APU they've released. These single-channel setups have got to be really starving the SoC.

    Either way, the performance picture points out what everyone already knows. Zen can't get to mobile quickly enough.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now