Acer Details Iconia W700 Windows 8 11.6-Inch Tablet PC
Prices range from $799 to $999.
After announcing three Windows 8-powered ultrabooks, Acer has detailed the pricing, full specification list, as well as U.S. and Canadian availability of their Iconia W700 Windows 8 tablet.
Due to ship on October 26, there will be three variants of the Iconia W700. Depending on hardware configuration, they'll range from $799 ($749 in Canada) to $999.
The cradle of Acer’s Windows 8 tablets are designed to hold the tablet at a variety of angles and orientations, while all three devices will feature the usual sensors: an electronic compass, gyroscope and accelerometer.
![]()
According to Acer, the three tablets can perform a cold boot in just six seconds, with its Bluetooth keyboard making it easier for those who don't wish to type on the touchscreen. A protective case is included in the box, and a Micro-HDMI to VGA adapter are also included.
Acer Iconia W700-6691:
- Intel Core i5-3317U 1.7GHz Processor w/Turbo Boost up to 2.6 GHz
- 11.6″ 1920 x 1080 resolution LED backlit TFT LCD display w/ 10-point multi-touch screen
- 4GB of DDR3 RAM
- Intel HD Graphics 4000 w/128MB RAM
- 64GB SSD
- 802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi + Bluetooth 4.0
- 5MP, 1080p rear-facing camera
- 1280×1024, 720p front-facing camera
- 1 USB 3.0, 1 Micro-HDMI, 1 3.5mm headphone/mic jack
- Up to 9 hours battery life
- 17″ (L) x 3.28″ (W) x 9.25″ (H), 2.09 lbs
Acer Iconia W700-6465:
- Intel Core i5-3317U 1.7GHz Processor w/Turbo Boost up to 2.6 GHz
- 11.6″ 1920 x 1080 resolution LED backlit TFT LCD display w/ 10-point multi-touch screen
- 4GB of DDR3 RAM
- Intel HD Graphics 4000 w/128MB RAM
- 128GB SSD
- 802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi + Bluetooth 4.0
- 5MP, 1080p rear-facing camera
- 1280×1024, 720p front-facing camera
- 1 USB 3.0, 1 Micro-HDMI, 1 3.5mm headphone/mic jack
- Up to 9 hours battery life
- 17″ (L) x 3.28″ (W) x 9.25″ (H), 2.09 lbs
Acer Iconia W700-6607:
- Intel Core i3-3317U 1.8GHz Processor
- 11.6″ 1920 x 1080 resolution LED backlit TFT LCD display w/ 10-point multi-touch screen
- 4GB of DDR3 RAM
- Intel HD Graphics 4000 w/128MB RAM
- 64GB SSD
- 802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi + Bluetooth 4.0
- 5MP, 1080p rear-facing camera
- 1280×1024, 720p front-facing camera
- 1 USB 3.0, 1 Micro-HDMI, 1 3.5mm headphone/mic jack
- Up to 9 hours battery life
- 17″ (L) x 3.28″ (W) x 9.25″ (H), 2.09 lbs
Even if the high price is due to this tablet basically being a laptop equivalent, the interface is not good enough to actually be productive (do actual work).
Intel graphics are laughable as well on something this expensive.
I would have also liked for a cheaper device that has a lower resolution screen, more variety for other people, and to make it even better equipped with an AMD APU.
I'd really like to know how much video-playback time these get.
But I have to say, if I needed a productivity device vs. a media consumption device, I'd get a Windows8 tablet in a heartbeat over any of the other tablet offerings. But since my work provides a laptop for work, it's not like I need a personal productivity device for much of anything.
I hope windows 8 tablets will force some modicum of standards and consistency for android tablets. The advantage of the android platform is also its undoing--diversity in hardware platforms. I have and use my android tablet, but the user experience isn't always the best (that's an understatement).
Most traditional applications will work better with a keyboard and mouse. Trying to click on those tiny button and menu on a 1920x1080 resolution using finger is an exercise in frustration.
There is nothing really NEW here... the x86 tablets have been around $1000~1400 for the past 3 years.
Except given that the CPU in this thing is an i5 (decent--definitely not low-end), so why would someone hypothetically substitute it with a low-end APU? If you wanted to just match CPUs based on TDP, the i5-3317U is a 17w CPU. The best match would be the A6-4455M (it's a 17w TDP chip) which has the HD7500G, which pretty much matches HD4000 in performance--the HD4K isn't impressive in comparison). That's basically the lowest-performing GPU in AMDs mobile APU lineup, but better GPUs in the higher TDP APUs. If you want to make a comparison, at least use similarly-spec'd components. Don't just arbitrarily pick low-end if it is nowhere near the performance of the thing you're comparing it to.