AMD should show OEMs middle finger and make their own devices, at least some. Because FX-7600p was not delivered, FX-8800p gets delivered in few poor configurations. Those OEMs have no vision / understanding what APUs are for, or they are clearly sabotaging AMD. Poor sales are because people are waiting and waiting till they give up and buy intel's device since those are available in any imaginable configuration. I'll be waiting till That proper FX-8800p netbook is made. Intel does not have what I want and will not have it even in next year.

AMD should show OEMs middle finger and make their own devices, at least some. Because FX-7600p was not delivered, FX-8800p gets delivered in few poor configurations. Those OEMs have no vision / understanding what APUs are for, or they are clearly sabotaging AMD. Poor sales are because people are waiting and waiting till they give up and buy intel's device since those are available in any imaginable configuration. I'll be waiting till That proper FX-8800p netbook is made. Intel does not have what I want and will not have it even in next year.

What is it exactly that you expect since Intel does not have what you want? Just genuinely curious, I've always found laptops with Intel hardware that suit me. Quite easily actually.

Intel can't match AMD in graphical performance when you go to small form factors. While intel may have now quite stronger iGPU (not better from rendering IQ), those come only in high wattage chips and at high prices. High wattage&price prevents you from getting small form factor 12~14'' with good battery life, weight, price. If you go for low power intel's CPU, you can pair it with AMD/nVidia GPU, but then it fails at weight or space for battery (battery life). And this increases complexity (price). And is likely worse in total performance vs same 15/35 W configured FX-8800p. AMD can fit such APU even into 10'' bit thicker netbook (like 2cm) and still have great battery life. +I want it for HSA development.

I'm pretty sure that the upcoming Intel chips with Iris Pro wipe the floor with Carrizo. Not only in CPU performance but in GPU performance too while having much better battery life. They may not be very cheap but they will be faster, especially when it comes to CPU performance. It would still be nice to see some decent Carrizo laptops. If you for some reason want HSA then you have no options. Though it's completely irrelevant feature at the moment for any user.

What is it exactly that you expect since Intel does not have what you want? Just genuinely curious, I've always found laptops with Intel hardware that suit me. Quite easily actually.

That's the problem with AMD hardware right now, there is no room in the mobile market for them. Intel has it in every segment of mobile computing(Not counting smart phones.). Their new mobile APU's look amazing, but they offer nothing needed over what Intel has. That, and Intel has a hold on the OEMs.

+I want it for HSA development.

I'm pretty sure that the upcoming Intel chips with Iris Pro wipe the floor with Carrizo. Not only in CPU performance but in GPU performance too while having much better battery life. They may not be very cheap but they will be faster, especially when it comes to CPU performance. It would still be nice to see some decent Carrizo laptops. If you for some reason want HSA then you have no options. Though it's completely irrelevant feature at the moment for any user.

There is quite discord between bold parts. Other than that I agree that intel can deliver higher performance, I would not be so enthusiastic about standards/IQ. Nor performance per $ or per watt. And you are right that upcoming AMD's mobile chips will wipe floor with intel's desktops. (upcoming versus available - just to see market relevance) Some people here shown how much IrisPro breaks graphics. Actually more than I would believe, but screenshots are screenshots. Btw, while I am not interested in intel's mobile chips, which are supposed to get high performing IrisPro iGPUs? As I was checking previous generations and intel never gave top of the line iGPU to lower power mobile chips. Same way as they are not making any mobile i5 chips, all are either i3 or i7, they just name some of them as i5. (Reason is simple: "Who would buy mobile i7 if there was real mobile i5?")

Only issue I've seen with Intel laptops is their drivers suck for igpu.

Only issue I've seen with Intel laptops is their drivers suck for igpu.

Not to mention that optimus thing which switches from igpu to dgpu. That thing simply refuses to work properly. Hell, at some point I simply uninstalled all optimus related things and the switch actually worked properly. Still working. Without a driver. Whoever coded that crap should be shot.

Iris Pro 6200 seems like a fast thing 20% faster then 7850k according to anandtech. That 14nm is going strong. Now if AMD ever gets to 14nm we should see somewhat better performance then 28nm parts now. Oh and I hate my intel drivers on my work laptop ffs.

Not to mention that optimus thing which switches from igpu to dgpu. That thing simply refuses to work properly. Hell, at some point I simply uninstalled all optimus related things and the switch actually worked properly. Still working. Without a driver. Whoever coded that crap should be shot.

Weird. I definitely have problems with it on Linux but I never had an issue with it on Windows and I always just let the Nvidia driver handle the GPU install.

Iris Pro 6200 seems like a fast thing 20% faster then 7850k according to anandtech. That 14nm is going strong. Now if AMD ever gets to 14nm we should see somewhat better performance then 28nm parts now. Oh and I hate my intel drivers on my work laptop ffs.

It is one with eDRAM. Used only in 4 CPUs, all of them 47W TDP not exactly stuff for 12'' netbook, unimaginable in 10''. and battery life with those is far from stellar. 3x are i7s ranging from $420 to $630 per chip. One is i3 which goes for $290 per chip. That is not cost friendly for netbooks too.

It is one with eDRAM. Used only in 4 CPUs, all of them 47W TDP not exactly stuff for 12'' netbook, unimaginable in 10''. and battery life with those is far from stellar. 3x are i7s ranging from $420 to $630 per chip. One is i3 which goes for $290 per chip. That is not cost friendly for netbooks too.

I feel like the GPU performance is irrelevant for the vast majority of users on a netbook/tablet. Like my Surface 3 has an i5 and honestly I'd rather have a Broadwell/Skylake Core-M with worse GPU performance (but shave 10-12w). The only gaming I do on it is via steam streaming anyway, which the Core-M is more than capable of. And aside from gaming what else am I doing with a netbook/tablet that requires massive graphics power? I'd rather have the battery.

Sure This is still quite batlle betwen amd and intel....hey you intel people,who prefer intel ,i dont like intel ever - i dont know why, but yust this hear,,,,what will be if was no amd ??? You will be buying your i5 and i i7 and titan for at last x3 price ,ha ??? So,dont be so hard to amd . Lets yust see what will be and a competition is a good thing for common people....:)

This is still quite batlle betwen amd and intel....hey you intel people,who prefer intel ,i dont like intel ever - i dont know why, but yust this hear,,,,what will be if was no amd ??? You will be buying your i5 and i i7 and titan for at last x3 price ,ha ??? So,dont be so hard to amd . Lets yust see what will be and a competition is a good thing for common people....:)

So what, I'm supposed to support a company that perpetually fails at releasing competitive products? I don't really care what anyone says, the moment AMD failed was the moment they decided to spend $5.4B on ATi. Literally every single analyst at the time said they overpaid for it. To make it worse, they sold off Imageon right after buying ATi. Qualcomm picked them up and now Qualcomm has the best Mobile-GPU's by a landslide. Anyway, since that moment they've been releasing subpar processors that are only competitive due to pricing. Which is fine if it's temporary, but it's not -- it's been what, 9 years since Core 2? Imagine if that $5.4 went towards a Bulldozer in 2008 or 2009. Imagine if it went into their fabrication division and they actually competed with Intel instead of spinning off Global Foundaries. Imagine if they actually hired a competent CEO instead of the garbage they've been hiring (Lisa Su is like the first person I like in that position for them). I definitely hope AMD comes back, or gets bought out and injected full of money. But in the mean time there is no way I'm buying inferior stuff because I feel bad that some corporation sucks at running a business. I buy based on my budget and my budget is pretty high, thus I'll continue to buy Intel while they have the better performing desktop chips and lower power mobile chips.

@ Fox - APU's are bottom bin junk at the moment. They have higher TDP's and power usage than their Intel competition, and only offer ether competing performance at best, or far lower at worst. And I'm sorry, but no one gives two sh!ts about the iGPU's in most laptops as long as they are able to display the web, play videos, and the occasional Facebook/side scroller. You want to do heavy productivity you go to the cloud or other off-loading measures, you only need to be able to run the basic productivity suites, and run them well enough, for a mobile platform. This doesn't leave much room for HSA especially considering the additional power overhead. All that, and CPU performance leaves much to be desired for current APU's (and their power consumption for it). Now that is out of the way, what's left? Bottom bin netbooks, and gaming laptops, both niche markets at this point with netbooks overtaken by Chromebooks and tablets. So that pretty much leaves gaming laptops. Now guess what, if someone is paying the large amount extra $$$ necessary for a gaming laptop, they are going to be looking for the large performance increase a dGPU brings for not much extra (note, the Kaveri in the following benchmark was paired with a fast SSD and DDR3-1866): http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph8119/64330.png So where exactly is the market for a mobile APU? Exactly, that is what the OEM's haven't figured out either.

AMD should show OEMs middle finger and make their own devices, at least some. Because FX-7600p was not delivered, FX-8800p gets delivered in few poor configurations. Those OEMs have no vision / understanding what APUs are for, or they are clearly sabotaging AMD. Poor sales are because people are waiting and waiting till they give up and buy intel's device since those are available in any imaginable configuration. I'll be waiting till That proper FX-8800p netbook is made. Intel does not have what I want and will not have it even in next year.

wtf? apparently i have been out of the loop. Since when did they start labeling any of their APU's as FX processors? this saddens me.

@ Fox - APU's are bottom bin junk at the moment. They have higher TDP's and power usage than their Intel competition, and only offer ether competing performance at best, or far lower at worst. And I'm sorry, but no one gives two sh!ts about the iGPU's in most laptops as long as they are able to display the web, play videos, and the occasional Facebook/side scroller. You want to do heavy productivity you go to the cloud or other off-loading measures, you only need to be able to run the basic productivity suites, and run them well enough, for a mobile platform. This doesn't leave much room for HSA especially considering the additional power overhead. All that, and CPU performance leaves much to be desired for current APU's (and their power consumption for it). Now that is out of the way, what's left? Bottom bin netbooks, and gaming laptops, both niche markets at this point with netbooks overtaken by Chromebooks and tablets. So that pretty much leaves gaming laptops. Now guess what, if someone is paying the large amount extra $$$ necessary for a gaming laptop, they are going to be looking for the large performance increase a dGPU brings for not much extra (note, the Kaveri in the following benchmark was paired with a fast SSD and DDR3-1866): http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph8119/64330.png So where exactly is the market for a mobile APU? Exactly, that is what the OEM's haven't figured out either.

Don't get offended, but creative people are not using cloud for Cpp, Direct compute, cuda, ... And why you show CPU that has 15W TDP, +35W dGPU, +2~5W MB required to connect and power those. So, you are comparing up to 55W system versus previous generation incomplete SoC running at 35W. FX-8800p does better at same power draw and considerably better on lower power draw. How big notebook with 55W CPU+dGPU have to be to have same battery life like 12'' APU running 35W? Like 15.6''? How good framerate that 55W system gets if you force it to 12W TDP CPU+dGPU? If that is even possible it will be considerably worse than that older FX-7600p forced to 12W. And I am far from interested in this last generation chip. FX-8800p is contender here. From AMD power efficiency roadmap I can already see some new features in Fury X. Like fine frequency & voltage granularity, interframe power gating. And those are in FX-8800p too + whatever AMD moved there. So while AMD is still at 28nm, those parts are quite competitive with intel's 14nm parts in certain power target range. As you can see above, I wrote that intel can easily crush AMD at high performance (wattage), but that is because 14nm simply is more power efficient there and it is out of AMD's control. And they are smart not to bring products there. So I stay firm with my statement that AMD's FX-8800p can fail only if not delivered in proper netbook/notebook. And there is none today and none announced. People are waiting for next batches of Fury X (again and again sold out), and they would be waiting for 12'' FX-8800p without dGPU, without overcomplicated MB, but with extra battery in place of those unnecessary internals. So remember, AMD results are not poor because of constantly failing to make good chips, they are poor for not having them on shelves.

I'm actually fairly satisfied with the performance from my HD4000 laptop (14" HP Envy). I didn't get it for gaming but it'll still play the occasional older title or mini game quite well (4th gen i5). It's much better for gaming than my last AMD laptop with an APU (albeit, a cheap 2012 laptop). The battery life while gaming is about 2-3 hours. I'll probably never buy a "gaming" laptop but I'd still like it to be capable of some gaming. It's great that onboard graphics have made quite the leap in the past few years.

This is still quite batlle betwen amd and intel....hey you intel people,who prefer intel ,i dont like intel ever - i dont know why, but yust this hear,,,,what will be if was no amd ??? You will be buying your i5 and i i7 and titan for at last x3 price ,ha ??? So,dont be so hard to amd . Lets yust see what will be and a competition is a good thing for common people....:)

Same exact pricing, not like Intel has any competition atm. Amd got my money socket 939 and prior when they had great performance. I am not going to buy subpar amd stuff to help them out.

wtf? apparently i have been out of the loop. Since when did they start labeling any of their APU's as FX processors? this saddens me.

Only June 2014. I do not get naming scheme too. They had FX-7600p/7500 (35 and 19W parts). Then A10-7400p was FX-7500 configured to 35W. Maybe those FX parts were more power efficient, hard to say, not many made it into market.