HP $220 14" 1080p display Light duty Laptop. Not on sale yet.

[Macgyversite]

Amazon will have this for sale. Great price for a 1080P display.

Not for sale yet.

https://www.amazon.com/HP-14-an013nr-14-Inch-Notebook-Drive/dp/B01F4ZG68A

.

 

[Roland00Address]

.45 cinebench r11.5 single thread

1.78 cinebench r11.5 multithread

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-E-Series-E2-7110-Notebook-Processor.144996.0.html

passmark single thread 698, multithread 2036

----

for comparisson the best intel atom chip x7 8700 in the surface 3 (non pro)

.46 cinebench r11.5 single thread
1.79 cinebench r11.5 multithread

-----

passmark single thread 554, multithread 1951 for the x8 8700 over a wide variety of form factors

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Atom-x7-Z8700-Benchmarks.140906.0.html


-----

That said the fact it is a 1080p ips screen, 4gbs, of ram and a 14" screen makes it much better than some other devices if you want a laptop vs tablet.

For example the screen area of a 14" 16x9 laptop vs a 10.1" 16x10 tablet

http://www.displaywars.com/14-inch-16x9-vs-10,1-inch-16x10

83.75 square inches vs 45.85 square inches

 

[Elixer]

Amazon will have this for sale. Great price for a 1080P display.

Not for sale yet.

https://www.amazon.com/HP-14-an013nr-14-Inch-Notebook-Drive/dp/B01F4ZG68A

.

They list no ETA, so, we have no idea if this will be a good deal or not by the time it ships.

 

[Macgyversite]

Yup. It is what it is. Would be a good buy if it was ready by back to school sales.

 

[Mike64]

I almost made this comment on Slickdeals, but decided not to "risk" the spate of (mostly) vitriolic and/or stupid comments that would've resulted, but I'm not sure I'd really call this a "laptop"? I mean, sure it'll fit on a person's lap and it's certainly portable, but, mostly based on the amount of RAM, it looks a lot more like a somewhat souped-up "netbook" than a "laptop". Still not bad for the price given the screen resolution and amount of RAM, but I strongly suspect neither the RAM nor, more importantly, the eMMC will be replaceable which, even aside from sheer processing power, is pretty limiting even though one can always use USB-attached storage...

 

[Roland00Address]

I almost made this comment on Slickdeals, but decided not to "risk" the spate of (mostly) vitriolic and/or stupid comments that would've resulted, but I'm not sure I'd really call this a "laptop"? I mean, sure it'll fit on a person's lap and it's certainly portable, but, mostly based on the amount of RAM, it looks a lot more like a somewhat souped-up "netbook" than a "laptop". Still not bad for the price given the screen resolution and amount of RAM, but I strongly suspect neither the RAM nor, more importantly, the eMMC will be replaceable which, even aside from sheer processing power, is pretty limiting even though one can always use USB-attached storage...

It is a craptop. I can give you a whole speech about how the low end of computers change from 2007 to 2015 (the reason why I picked 2007 for that was the introduction of the linux eeePC which then started the windows netbook craze of 2008 to 2010) Here is the shorter version.

Pretty much from the 2nd half of 2013 to today on we started seeing baytrail atoms in 14" and 15" body be the new low end for any computer priced $350 or under MSRP.



Yet during a small period of 2010 to half of 2013 we saw the low end use amd dual cores, or intel dual cores based off core 2 duo, 1st gen i3, or 2nd gen i3 depending on the year. Those 2010 to 2013 computers were based off the lastest tech or 1 year old tech where they used the old fabs for the cheap stuff but the newer stuff got the new fabs. Regardless those cpus from 2010 to 2013 were "REAL MEN" cpus for they were based off the same tech but were "gimped in some way" with these intel celeron and pentium naming where the things you gave up were. 1) Hyperthreading. 2) Better graphics but all of these from 2010 on could handle flash and some could handle hd video. 3) Lower Cache. 4) Lower mhz speed with speeds of 1.5 to 2.4 were the standard celeron or pentium sku speeds depending on yeaer.

I would rather have a 2013 cheap laptop than a 2015 cheap laptop for the 2013 model would get me an the intel celeron 1000m at 1.8 ghzs dual core 35w, or 1007u at 1.5 ghz bought in 2013 for $300 on sale, 400 at MSRP than these newer cpus in the computers. These cpus were both ivybridge. Spend a little more and you got a 2.5 ghz pentium at 35w with the 2050m and the 2127u was 1.9 ghz at 17w. The 17w i3 skus were the same clock speed but had better graphics and hyperthreading. The only downsides of these 2013 computers were the screens sucked, but all laptops under a $1000 dollars were using TN screens at that time, it was just a question of how bad your tn screen was. (Sony and some other people were starting to use e-ips screens in their laptops but like I said they were expensive)

But ever since the last two quarters of 2013 we been seeing baytrail and similar amds occupy the low end, for computers that are priced $350 and under (MSRP)

The good news in 2016 for that price point you are starting to see ips screens for such a cheap "cloudbook" aka a craptop.

-----

Now I am not dissing this cloudbook deal for it has 32 gbs of a real ssd instead of emmc storage, 4gbs of ram, and a 1080p ips screen. While the amd cpu in there is not a speed demon it is faster than many phones that people had in 2015 or earlier, though some phones in 2015 were faster and most of the high end cellphones in 2016 is way faster.

So call it a cloud book, a budget / cheap laptop, a craptop whatever you want to call it. It may not be an upgradable laptop but for this price I am so glad we are not dealing with the cheap shit we saw from late 2013, 2014, and 2015.

In other word a fine computer for internet, yet I would not use the adjective laptop and would instead call it a cloudbook or a craptop.

----

Honestly it will not be this cheap but if your budget was $300+ I would recommend looking at the dell outlet website for overstocked computers, returned, or refurbished computers, and then wait for Dell to have one of those 30 to 35% off sales they have once a month or so on anything from the outlet. If you get a pc from their business line it comes with a 3 year warranty at no extra cost due to how the outlet works. The outlet warranties are the same as the brand new warranties, yet dell tries to upsale you for things like onsite fixing and such instead of you using a ups or fedex box. Note if you do the dell outlook route understand computers on the home side often have a 1 year warranty instead of 3 years due to most computers on the home side start with a 1 year warranty unlike the businesses side's 3 year warranty.

But remember those are computers you buy for $300 or more, (though sometimes they go cheaper), for a 1080p ips 4gb ram 32gb ssd emmc flash, high end amd atom competitor this is not bad.

 

[Mike64]

Now I am not dissing this cloudbook deal for it has a real ssd instead of emmc

That would indeed have made a big difference (on the presumption that it could be replaced with a bigger one, if not necessarily with ease.) But sadly not. Or at least apparently not. This model isn't even up on HP's site yet (or at least I couldn't find it) so I guess we won't know for sure until it does or someone can and does buy one, but the "32 GB SSD Hard Drive" and "32GB solid state drive" descriptors at the very top of the page notwithstanding, a third of the way down the page in Amazon's standardized Product Information section it says "Flash Memory Size: 32.0", and halfway down the page in the "Full Specifications" section, it says "storage" is a "32GB eMMC". One wild guess which of those I give credence to.:whiste:

 

[Roland00Address]

That would indeed have made a big difference (on the presumption that it could be replaced with a bigger one, if not necessarily with ease.) But sadly not. Or at least apparently not. This model isn't even up on HP's site yet (or at least I couldn't find it) so I guess we won't know for sure until it does or someone can and does buy one, but the "32 GB SSD Hard Drive" and "32GB solid state drive" descriptors at the very top of the page notwithstanding, a third of the way down the page in Amazon's standardized Product Information section it says "Flash Memory Size: 32.0", and halfway down the page in the "Full Specifications" section, it says "storage" is a "32GB eMMC". One wild guess which of those I give credence to.:whiste: It's kind of funny, I didn't even notice the "solid state drive" language the first time around,

This processor uses the Carrizo-L motherboard platform. Would eMMC work with that? To my understanding eMMC is done in a BGA straight on the circuit board.

I do not know the answer and that is why I am asking.

 

[Mike64]

This processor uses the Carrizo-L motherboard platform. Would eMMC work with that?

Dunno, I was just operating on the principle: "When in doubt about an advertisement, assume the worst." Guess we'll have to wait until it hits HP's website to find out...

 

[Macgyversite]

Now I am not dissing this cloudbook deal for it has a real ssd instead of emmc, 4gbs of ram, and a 1080p ips screen. While the amd cpu in there is not a speed demon it is faster than many phones that people had in 2015 or earlier, though some phones in 2015 were faster and most of the high end cellphones in 2016 is way faster.

So call it a cloud book, a budget / cheap laptop, a craptop whatever you want to call it. It may not be an upgradable laptop but for this price I am so glad we are not dealing with the cheap shit we saw from late 2013, 2014, and 2015.

Thats Funny. My Title says Light Duty Laptop. This pretty much says in Three words what most people need to know about this laptop.

PLEASE Link us with some good stats(not opinions) that show this laptop is slower than Most Cell phones.

http://www.passmark.com/forum/showthread.php?3381-Comparing-computers-to-phones-CPU-performance

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2154892/phone-cpu-cpu.html

.

 

[Mike64]

Thats Funny. My Title says Light Duty Laptop. This pretty much says in Three words what most people need to know about this laptop.

PLEASE Link us with some good stats(not opinions) that show this laptop is slower than Most Cell phones.

The thing isn't even up on HP's website let alone available for purchase, so how could anyone post "good stats"? (Or for that matter have any real, actual idea whether it will suit their needs?) No offense intended, but why should anyone wait to comment on it if no one's waiting to post it as a "hot deal" until even a release date is announced publicly?

 

[Macgyversite]

It is considered a Hot deal because you can Pre Order it at this price.

It was supposed to be released May 29th.

Stats. The CPU and Chipset are from 2015.

No offense but can't you read?

 

[holden j caufield]

Having used a previous version of that amd cpu, it was pretty slow, and it was in a netbook. 32gb slow SSD, WTF? After the OS how much space is there? Is this a disposable laptop because I don't see anything great about this thing?

Honestly I've bought used thinkpads with warranties for a little more than this. I'd rather go that route. IMO and we've gone through thousands of laptops through the years Thinkpads > Latitudes > Elitebooks (all decent though). Consumer line HPs were also the worst and probably 10 levels below the elitebooks in terms of reliability.

 

[Mike64]

It is considered a Hot deal because you can Pre Oerder it at this price.

It was supposed to be released May 29th.

Stats. The CPU and Chipset are from 2015.

No offense but can't you read?

Order what exactly? A computer that may or may not as a complete whole perform up to the generic specs of its alleged individual components when - at some point in the as yet undetermined future (already 3 weeks past the alleged release date) it will, presumably at least, be available for sale? Does the temperature of the deal depend on it having a "real" SSD, and if so will it in fact be that or an eMMC? Are the other specs posted by Amazon but not verifiable on HP's website in fact correct? I don't know why you're taking comments about the product personally, and I didn't originally post to thread dump, but now that you mention it...

 

[Roland00Address]

Thats Funny. My Title says Light Duty Laptop. This pretty much says in Three words what most people need to know about this laptop.

PLEASE Link us with some good stats(not opinions) that show this laptop is slower than Most Cell phones.

http://www.passmark.com/forum/showthread.php?3381-Comparing-computers-to-phones-CPU-performance

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2154892/phone-cpu-cpu.html

.

Okay how about this.

Are you familiar with the 22nm atom called Intel Atom Processor Z3580 which is a 2.33 ghz atom quad core for phones? It was the cpu used in the Asus Zenfone 2 ZE551ML phone which when released at MRSP was $299 for the 2.33 ghz 4gb phone and now sells at amazon for $250. (Do note the Zenfone 2 had a cheaper $199 model that was 1.83 ghz and 2gb of ram) This cpu was also used in Dell's 8 inch high end tablet and Asus's 8 inch high end tablet.

Currently the best intel atom chip is the 14nm atom x7 8700. What you gain compared to the z3580 is a die shrik to 14nm so supposedly better power management, a 3% increase of clock speed (2.40 ghz vs 2.33), less than 5% cpu improvements for the same clock, and a better gpu. Effectively the Z3580 in real world situations perform similarly to the x7 8700 with less than a 10% difference at all cpu loads.

And the 2nd post of this thread I posted both cinebench numbers and passmark numbers for this amd cpu and I compared it to the atom x7 8700 which is currently the best atom, but even so the atom z3580 would also be very close in performance to this AMD cpu

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=38304330&postcount=2

In those numbers I provided earlier you will see that with the cinbebench comparing the x7 8700 to the amd cpu, in some tests they are within 1% of each other

In passmark multithread the best case scenario the amd is 5% faster, that said in single thread in the best case scenario it is 25% faster.

-----

Are you with me here why I am first comparing an amd chip to a mobile atom chip? I am establishing that since we have no amd phones, and we have no arm laptops, and we want to establish comparisons using the same type of operating system and same type of software. Using the x86 atom's we have in android tablets and android phones will make sense comparing it to arm android tablets and phones.

Now what devices are using the atom z3580 with android. Well it was the cpu in the Zenfone 2's best model, that phone went for $299 in 2015 and goes for $250 today. (Note asus also had a 1.8 ghz atommodel for $199 in 2015).

The z3580 is also used in the high end android 8" zenpad s tablet and the high end android Dell Venue 8 tablet with OLED Screen.

-----

Now lets use anandtech's phone and tablet bench. Now remember when you are using the phone bench there are cpu tasks and gpu tasks we only care about the cpu tasks

Here is the basemark system numbers (the system test is the cpu test)

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/PhoneTablet14/1143

Here is two javascript benchmarks. Now ignore any wndows pc device or apple device for they use different browsers, but all the android devices use the same chrome browser, and we want to compare devices with the same browser so that we see cpu performance and not software optimization

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/PhoneTablet14/939

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/PhoneTablet14/937


There are also other cpu benchmarks but I picked ones that are almost entirely cpu for I do not want to compare the gpus. Before we talk numbers let me reprint my quote incase you forgot the exact wording.

Now I am not dissing this cloudbook deal for it has a real ssd instead of emmc, 4gbs of ram, and a 1080p ips screen. While the amd cpu in there is not a speed demon it is faster than many phones that people had in 2015 or earlier, though some phones in 2015 were faster and most of the high end cellphones in 2016 is way faster.

Basemark OS 2.0 System Test (the cpu based test of the Basemark benchmark suite)

Samsung Galaxy S7 (E8890) Exynos 8890 2.6/1.59GHz
4156

Asus ZenFone 2
1986

Higher is better so the new samsung is a 109% faster in this benchmark

-----

Kraken 1.1

Samsung Galaxy S7 (E8890) Exynos 8890 2.6/1.59GHz
2827

Asus Zenfone 2
5000

lower is better, so the new samsung is 76% faster

-----

Octane v2

Samsung Galaxy S7 (E8890) Exynos 8890 2.6/1.59GHz
10861

Asus Zenpad S tablet (uses same atom chip as the zenfone 2)
8412

Dell Venue 8" 7840 (uses same atom chip as the zenfone 2
7229

Asus Zenfone 2...Throttling?
6207

In this test Higher is better. Now with these numbers the atom is not as much behind and is doing a more respectable job when compared to the Samsung S7 Exynos being faster by only 29% faster in one device, 50% in a 2nd, and 75% in another

----

Regardless as you can see all the 2016 high end cpus trounce the atom z3580 by 30% to 110% on cpu tasks. Even if we assume the amd is 30% faster than the atom in limited scenarios this still means it is slower than 2016 high end by a lot in most tests, but in one test it gets a tied score.

Now I am not dissing this cloudbook deal for it has a real ssd instead of emmc, 4gbs of ram, and a 1080p ips screen. While the amd cpu in there is not a speed demon it is faster than many phones that people had in 2015 or earlier, though some phones in 2015 were faster and most of the high end cellphones in 2016 is way faster.

I stand by my original statement

 

[cbn]

If looking at the part of the listing that is from the manufacturer it says "32GB eMMC" in both the "full specifications" and "key specs".

In the same section it also has an image with a picture of eMMC:

 

[13Gigatons]

SUB

 

[VirtualLarry]

eMMC kills it for me. If it were a real (removable, upgradable) SSD, it would be a lock-in. I'd put Windows 7, and have a FHD screen. It would be glorious. Unfortunately, they put in a nice screen, but cost-cut elsewhere.

 

[Macgyversite]

Sorry but they arent using the same software to bench test one platform to another.

This CPU/chipset has more memory bandwidth.

This VPU can process more data.

Can play way more complex games.

Can crunch a video way faster.

If you statements were true. Your Cell phones would need a large cooler to keep the CPU cool because Calculations and CPU function have a direct effect on thermal output.

If your statements were all true then ALL SERVERS worldwide would be using CELL phone CPU/VPU to run them just for the thermal and energy savings.

All you proved is that a Phone can do some similar benchmarks designed to be run on a phone. Its just not the same thing because its not the same benchmark.

When your Cell phones can run Quake3 or Original DOOM with the same FPS as this PC. Then you will have something.

Right here are some numbers that directly counter yours.

http://www.passmark.com/forum/showthread.php?3381-Comparing-computers-to-phones-CPU-performance

 

[Roland00Address]

I was talking about CPU

VPU, GPU, and Game FPS are not CPU

Second your thread you link even says they are DIFFERENT TESTS THAT ARE NOT COMPARABLE

-----

Whatever I am done, you can show a thirsty donkey water but you can't make him drink