#5 The Lenovo Y700 (Carrizo, FX-8800P + R9 385MX)

The Y700 pre-release unit we had access to didn't have a battery, or a wireless module. But it did have a ‘neat’ trick compared to the other APUs in this test, in that it is the 35W model of the AMD FX-8800P, which adds a bit more frequency in exchange for some additional power draw. Moving to 35W affords some benefits we’ll go into in a bit, although for some odd reason Lenovo didn’t take them here.

Lenovo Y700 (Carrizo) Specifications
Size and Resolution 15.6-inch, 1920x1080 IPS
Processor AMD FX-8800P (35W)
Dual module, 4 threads
2.1 GHz Base Frequency
3.4 GHz Turbo Frequency
Graphics Integrated R7
512 Shader Cores
800 MHz maximum frequency
GCN 1.2

AMD R9 385MX Discrete GPU with 2GB GDDR5
512 Shader Cores
900-1000 MHz Core, 1200 MHz Memory
GCN 1.2

Dual Graphics Not Available in Drivers
TDP Chassis: 15W
CPU: 35W
Memory 16 GB in Single Channel Operation
2 x 8GB at DDR3L-1600 C11
Single Channel ONLY
Storage 256GB Sandisk
Battery Size None in our model
80Wh with 4 cell Li-ion design otherwise
WiFi None in our model
802.11ac M.2 otherwise
Optical Drive Optional
Dimensions 15.24 x 10.91 x 1.02-inch
38.7 x 27.7 x 2.60 cm
Weight 5.72 lbs
2.6 kg
Webcam 1280x720 with array microphones
Ports Memory Card Reader
HDMI
2 x USB 3.0 + 1 x USB 2.0
Ethernet
Operating System Windows 10 Home
Website Link link

The Y700 here is paired with a discrete graphics card, AMD's Radeon R9 385MX, which offers 512 streaming processors. The FX-8800P processor also has R7 graphics and 512 SPs at 800 MHz, and in theory one might think that these two automatically work with each other in dual graphics mode – but this design is not set up that way. So for this design, the user is paying for almost the same graphics design twice (though the discrete card has access to much faster memory), but one is essentially disabled or only comes on when the discrete card is shut off. Arguably one might postulate that the active idle power of the integrated graphics is lower than that of the discrete, but it seems expensive just for the sake of a few hundred mW. There could be another reason in display support, but it still seems odd. The user can however manually choose to invoke whichever graphics solution they wish from the Catalyst menu.

Another element of the design worth questioning is the memory. Carrizo as a platform does support dual channel memory, but it shares a design structure with Carrizo-L (Puma+) which is single channel only. As a result, a number of OEMs have designed one motherboard for both platforms, which means all Carrizo under that design are limited to single channel operation, reducing performance for the sake of some PCB design. This is an aspect we’ll get on to later, but it means that the Y700 has access to 16GB of DDR3L-1600 CAS 11 but in single channel mode. The fact that it is DDR3L-1600, even though Carrizo supports DDR3-2133, is another angle to tackle on how such a design can have performance issues.

For the other specifications, the Y700 gets a 1920x1080 IPS screen, a 256 GB Sandisk SSD and some Wi-Fi in an M.2 form factor. I say ‘some’ Wi-Fi, purely because our pre-production unit didn’t have any.

This low quality image of the insides shows the dual fan design for the 35W APU and discrete graphics, and we can confirm we didn’t see any throttling during our testing. The two memory modules, despite being part of a single channel design, sit on the right below the slim hard drive which we replaced with the 256 GB Sandisk SSD. There is also an M.2 slot next to this, though I believe this is SATA only, supporting form factors up to 2280.

Next to the M.2 slot is the bass speaker. The Y700 has an extra vent at the bottom for better sound, rather than muffled in a chassis:

The keyboard we had in our model was a mix English/Japanese variant, though the red backlight was easy to see through.

Brett actually has the Skylake variant in for testing, so I'll let him mull over the design a bit more, but on the sides:

The left gets a charging point, a USB 3.0 port, a multi card reader and a headphone jack. On the right are two more USB ports, a HDMI port, an expanding Ethernet port and a Kensington Lock hole.

Y700 Specific Testing

In the case of the display, out of those we tested it actually comes best in terms of color accuracy. While I don’t have a spectrophotometer to show you exactly in numbers, the colorimeter graph does the business:

Here red and blue are pretty much dead on accurate, but green is straying too low. The panel gives a good 1032 contrast ratio, with 0.216 nits at low brightness and 223 nits at peak. The peak isn’t very high, which might be a bit concerning in bright lights.

One of the downsides to these configurable TDP processors is that the ‘max TDP’ string doesn’t change. It is up to the OEM to do the firmware adjustments, but chances are they won’t open it up to regular users in case someone wants to put 35W through a chassis only designed to handle 15W. The way to tell is in the peak frequencies, and this one goes to eleven 3.4 GHz.

For the discrete GPU, we get 2 GB of dedicated memory and, thanks to the use of GDDR5, much greater bandwidth than just relying on DDR3 alone. The ‘CrossFire available’ message means that GPU-Z recognizes that the CPU and GPU can be both put to work together, but for whatever reason the drivers did not allow it when we tested.

The Devices: #4 The HP Pavilion 17z-g100 (Carrizo, A10-8700P) AMD’s Industry Problem
Comments Locked

175 Comments

View All Comments

  • karakarga - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Including all, AMD and nVidia both at their funeral state! They can not possibly open 22, 14, 10 etc. micron fabric.

    Intel spended 5 billion dollars to open their new Arizona factory, they will pass lower processes there as well. AMD and nVidia can not get, even a billion dollar profit in these years. It is impossible for them to spend that much money to a new low process factory.

    Those little tweaks can not help them to survive....
  • testbug00 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    They don't build factories. TSMC and Samsung (and GloFo to a lesser extent) build factories and do R&D for these processes. Nvidia, AMD. Samsung, Qualcomm, MediaTek and many other companies design chips to the standards of TSMC/Samsung/GloFo and pay money for wafers and running the wafers through the fab.

    The cost for this per wafer is meant to get all that money back in a few years. And than the process keeps on running for over 10 years sometimes.

    It is getting more expensive to get to smaller nodes and the performance increase and power decrease is getting smaller. And costs more to design chips and run wafers. So it is getting harder to find the funds to shrink. Which is one of the reasons Intel has delayed their 10nm process.
  • yannigr2 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Thanks for this review. Really needed for sometime. It was missing from the internet, not just Anandtech.

    As for the laptops, they say as much as there is to tell. Small Chinese makers, who no one knows they exist, would built better laptops than these. HP, Toshiba and Lenovo in this case, multibillion international giants that seems have all the technicians and the R&D funds necessary, end up producing Laptops with "strange" limitations, bad choices, low quality parts and in the end put prices that, even with all those bad choices and limitations, are NOT lower than those on Intel alternatives. It's almost as if Intel makes the choices for the parts in those laptops. Maybe their is a "trololol" sticker on them somewhere hidden addressed to AMD. I guess that way those big OEM don't make Intel too angry and at the same time, if there is another legal battle between AMD and Intel in the future, they will have enough excuses to show to the judge in their defense, if accused that they supported a monopoly.
  • ToTTenTranz - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    This article is what makes Anandtech great. Just keep being like this guys, your work is awesome!
    I'm going to spend some time clicking your ads, you deserve it :)

    As for the "poll" about who's to blame, IMHO it is:

    1 - AMD for letting OEMs place Carrizo in designs with terrible panels and single-channel solutions. It's just not good for the brand. "You can't put a Carrizo with single-channel cheap RAM because that's not how it was designed. You want to build bottom-of-the-barrel laptop? We have Carrizo-L for you."
    I'm pretty sure Intel has this conversation regarding Core M and Atom/Pentium/Celeron solutions. I know AMD is in a worse solution to negotiate, but downplaying Carrizo like this isn't good for anyone but Intel.
    In the end, what AMD needs is a guy who can properly sell their product. Someone who convince the OEMs that good SoCs need to be paired with decent everything-else.
    $500 is plenty for a 12/13" IPS/VA screen (even if it's 720/800p), 128GB SSD and 4+4GB DDR3L. Why not pull a Microsoft's Surface and build a decent SKU for that price range so that other OEMs can follow? Contract one OEM to make the device they envisioned, sell it and see all others following suit.

    2 - OEMs for apparently not having this ONE guy who calls the shots and knows that selling a crappy system automatically means losing customers. And this ONE other guy (or the same) for not knowing that constantly favoring Intel with their solutions is bound to make the whole company's life miserable if Intel's only competitor kicks the bucket. The consumer isn't meant to know these things, but the OEMs certainly are.
    It's 2016. We're way past the age of tricking the customer to buy a terrible user experience through big numbers (like "1TB drive woot"). He/She will feel like the money just wasn't and next time will buy a mac.
    Want a $300-400 price point? Get a Carrizo-L with a 128GB SSD and a 720p IPS panel. Want $500-700 Price point? Get a Carrizo with dual-channel, 256GB SSD and 900p/1080p IPS screen.
  • joex4444 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Anything under 1080p is simply not usable. All these 1366x768 panels are just awful. I have an old netbook with one (12.1") and I've put a small SSD in there and loaded it with Ubuntu. I cannot have a Google Hangouts window open and a web browser open wide enough to view most pages. Basic web browsing + IM - 1366x768 completely fails at the task.
  • testbug00 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    768p panels are fine if they are good quality, in 11" laptops.
    900p good up to 13", and 1080p minimum for 14+.

    Honestly I wish we stayed with 8:5 14x9, 16x10, 19x12z
  • jabber - Saturday, February 6, 2016 - link

    Indeed, 768p is fine on my 11" Samsung Chromebook but I would not tolerate it on anything bigger. IMO 1600x900 should be the minimum screen res for budget machines. 1080p for midrange and whatever you like for higher end.
  • jjpcat@hotmail.com - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link

    Resolution is not as important as the quality of the panel. I used a Lenovo X1 Carbon. It has a 14" 1080p screen. But it's a TN panel and that just makes it a pain in the ass. I am amazed that Lenovo uses such a lousy panel in its $1k+ laptop while some 10" sub-$200 tablets use IPS.
  • testbug00 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    Toshiba can make a $400 chromebook with a good 1080p display. Fully agreed.

    1080p panel, make it thicker so you can put a larger battery and so the laptop can handle up to 35W from the APU. Do dual channel.

    When plugged change APU power mad to 35W, when in battery make it 15W. Probably can be done for $500 for a 15" laptop with an A8. $50/100 upgrade to 128/256GB SSD and $50/100 upgrade to A10/FX.
  • Dobson123 - Friday, February 5, 2016 - link

    "The APU contains integrated ‘R6’ level graphics based on GCN 1.0, for 384 streaming processors at a frequency of 533 MHz."

    Isn't it GCN 1.1?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now