Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Report: Ultrabook Sales are on the Rise

By - Source: NPD Group | B 39 comments

Ultrabooks have captured nearly 11-percent of the $700+ notebook market in the first 5 months of 2012.

Looks as though Intel's Ultrabook form factor is catching on with consumers, as NPD Group reports that sales are off to a fast start, capturing nearly 11-percent of all $700+ Windows notebooks sales at U.S. retail through the first five months of 2012.

According to the report, the overall Windows market for notebook PC sales fell by 17-percent. However, Ultrabooks helped propel the premium market with Windows notebooks priced over $700 by just 3-percent. Those priced over $900 actually increased 39-percent compared to the same timeframe last year.

"Ultrabooks have helped establish a market for more premium-priced Windows notebooks at retail," said Stephen Baker, vice president of industry analysis at The NPD Group. "The share of sales that the $700+ notebook segment represents jumped from about 12 percent in 2011 to nearly 14 percent in 2012 as a result of the solid market acceptance Ultrabooks have gained.  Consumers continue to respond positively to finally being offered stylish, thinner, and more premium device offerings than ever before within the Windows ecosystem."

Strong sales in the Ultrabook sector may be a sign that consumers are willing to spend more money on a premium product. NPD points out that selling prices have averaged $927 over the first five months of 2012, and only dipped below $900, to $885, for the first time in May. This is obviously way above the Windows market price of $510 average pricing -- an average which has only risen by $13 since the same period in 2011, partially due to the growth in Ultrabook sales.

Baker said that lower-cost Ultrabooks, some as low as $699, will be the hot form factor as the crucial back-to-school selling season approaches.

"As we look towards the fourth quarter, the expected launch of Windows 8, a wide variety of Ultrabooks with touch screens, and convertible form factors should continue to make this class of product top of mind with the consumer as well as provide a much needed revenue boost to the entire PC ecosystem," he said.

Discuss
Display all 39 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 15 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , July 1, 2012 1:38 PM
    good for Intel.
    Bad for APPLE

    High Five !
Other Comments
  • 15 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , July 1, 2012 1:38 PM
    good for Intel.
    Bad for APPLE

    High Five !
  • 0 Hide
    cornandbeans , July 1, 2012 2:08 PM
    Not surprised, everyone around me is thinking of getting one too.
  • 2 Hide
    ohim , July 1, 2012 2:18 PM
    too bad they all have to cope with that crap video card from intel
  • 0 Hide
    AznCracker , July 1, 2012 2:25 PM
    ohimtoo bad they all have to cope with that crap video card from intel
    Well the ivy brudge ones come with an hd 4000 which is pretty decent for most things.

    I was thinking of getting an ultraboook but i got a dell xps 15z w/ i-7 and gt 525m for about the same price.
  • 3 Hide
    molo9000 , July 1, 2012 2:51 PM
    ohimtoo bad they all have to cope with that crap video card from intel


    Nobody buys these for gaming.
    At least current Intel graphics are decent enough to play most games. High graphics settings don't matter when playing on a 13" display.
  • 4 Hide
    DroKing , July 1, 2012 2:51 PM
    is amd verison out yet? Im not interested in intel at all.
  • 4 Hide
    tsnor , July 1, 2012 3:21 PM
    DroKingis amd verison out yet? Im not interested in intel at all.


    Ultrabook = Intel brand, you'll never see an Intel ultrabook.

    Sleekbook is the term HP uses for an AMD ultrabook. Not sure if others use it.

    "Im not interested in intel at all." you should be for many workloads. gaming for one. For notebooks I use E450 (too slow) and mobile i5-2400 (work system). Agree trinity based notebook better choice for me than intel parts. But the i5 system with discrete nvidia card is really nice.

  • 0 Hide
    boiler1990 , July 1, 2012 3:23 PM
    DroKingis amd verison out yet? Im not interested in intel at all.

    "Ultrabook" is a term coined by Intel (and trademarked, I believe). I don't think AMD is going to have many options since their partnerships are quite...slim...
  • 0 Hide
    DroKing , July 1, 2012 3:44 PM
    I know Ultrabooks are only Intel's. I am simply asking for AMD verison aka Ultrathins or whatever the name it was. btw tsnor, I will never be interested in Intel period. I am a PURE AMD fanboy. I dont care if their processors are 5-10 percent faster for 20-40 percent more expensive plus I hate intel because of their dirty business back in 90's aka athlon supremacy era.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , July 1, 2012 3:52 PM
    DroKing, last I saw, those CS5 benchmarks run on this site showed like a 6x difference... not 10% buddy. No offense, bt the CPU difference is vast. Anand testing the GPUs head to head and Trinity was only about 5-10% faster in GPU benchmarks so while Intel's GPUs are crap, AMD's top of the line was hardly a homerun in the mobile lineup. Going to 17W probably doesn't help matters either for AMD so I actuall expect them to have very similar GPU performance in the ultrabook/ultrathin market. Where AMD will win is with price which is good for the entire market. It brings the bottom line up.

    What I like most about these numbers is that Microsoft claims tablets will outsell notebooks next year, but it certainly isn't looking like that will be the case. People seem OK with paying a little more for a much better product. Windows RT will be a failure and ultrabook convertibles are likely to be what the consumer puts more stock into.
  • 1 Hide
    TheBigTroll , July 1, 2012 4:28 PM
    DroKingI know Ultrabooks are only Intel's. I am simply asking for AMD verison aka Ultrathins or whatever the name it was. btw tsnor, I will never be interested in Intel period. I am a PURE AMD fanboy. I dont care if their processors are 5-10 percent faster for 20-40 percent more expensive plus I hate intel because of their dirty business back in 90's aka athlon supremacy era.


    why not interested in Intel? they do perform better. i have used AMD when they were much better than intel, but those days are long gone
  • 1 Hide
    jojesa , July 1, 2012 5:01 PM
    DroKingI know Ultrabooks are only Intel's. I am simply asking for AMD verison aka Ultrathins or whatever the name it was. btw tsnor, I will never be interested in Intel period. I am a PURE AMD fanboy. I dont care if their processors are 5-10 percent faster for 20-40 percent more expensive plus I hate intel because of their dirty business back in 90's aka athlon supremacy era.

    Besides those benchmark that shows Intel Ultrabooks ahead of AMD Sleekbooks, most users won't see any differences in real life scenarios. If you look at HP lineup, you wouldn't be able to see the differences between the two, unless you are a Tom's reader. :) 
    AMD Sleekbooks are around $100 less expensive.
    The only advantage Ultrabooks have is the Intel Rapid technology when using a disk drive.
    I just called them all notebooks.
  • -1 Hide
    tsnor , July 1, 2012 5:21 PM
    Quote:
    I know Ultrabooks are only Intel's. I am simply asking for AMD verison aka Ultrathins or whatever the name it was. btw tsnor, I will never be interested in Intel period. I am a PURE AMD fanboy. I dont care if their processors are 5-10 percent faster for 20-40 percent more expensive plus I hate intel because of their dirty business back in 90's aka athlon supremacy era.


    Excellent. I still have an athlon 1.3ghx kicking in the basement and a 5000+ and 5200+ doing video capture duty daily. Next to me is a 3700+ that wouldn't go into raid with the pair of IDE (lol) maxtors i tried to stuff in so is headed back to the basement. I understand your thinking ... even though ford has great products, my local dealer is so bad I won't be buying one, so won't dispute it.

    Aside: "dont care if their processors are 5-10 percent faster for 20-40 percent more expensive" unfortunately for AMD the intel products are cheaper for better performance... at least for gaming.
  • -2 Hide
    Wisecracker , July 1, 2012 5:58 PM

    The Fanboy Troll Bunch is out in force, today.

    $600 Trinity Thin 17w
    http://shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Laptops/HP-ENVY/B2S72AV?HP-ENVY-Sleekbook-6z-1000

    Bumping up to the 25w quad A10-4655M will cost you $100.

    I haven't modded that specific model, but I'm typing away on an HP e350 laptop with an OCZ SSD boot drive and it's sweet. The closest HP ultrabook will cost you nearly $250 more than one of those modded Trinity Thins ...


    edit: .... I apologize if the truth clinches all your sphincters ...


  • 0 Hide
    A Bad Day , July 1, 2012 6:17 PM
    I don't think consumers care about prices if you have strong enough brand-recognition and a large volume of products.
  • 0 Hide
    jdwii , July 1, 2012 6:55 PM
    Quote:
    DroKing, last I saw, those CS5 benchmarks run on this site showed like a 6x difference... not 10% buddy. No offense, bt the CPU difference is vast. Anand testing the GPUs head to head and Trinity was only about 5-10% faster in GPU benchmarks so while Intel's GPUs are crap, AMD's top of the line was hardly a homerun in the mobile lineup. Going to 17W probably doesn't help matters either for AMD so I actuall expect them to have very similar GPU performance in the ultrabook/ultrathin market. Where AMD will win is with price which is good for the entire market. It brings the bottom line up.


    Under Normal conditions and testing Trinity is 30% faster then the 4000HD graphics from Intel now Llano and Ivy are about even but Llano still has a 5-10% edge not to mention Superior drivers.

    Now under normal CPU use No one in their right mind can tell a difference between a Ivy I3 or I5 vs a Trinity A10. Not to mention OpenCL is really taking off and this is making Trinity a better option when compared to a I5 or I3 ivy on price wise. Not to mention it should be priced in the 650$ market or below. Of course for 800$ a A10 is crap but for 650$ its a pretty good deal.

    What do people even do on their laptops facebook, browsing the web? Liston to music or watch 1080P Netflix videos or play a nice games of the sims or some WoW. Or do people run CS5 benchmarks?

    I would personally never buy a I7+Graphics card(Power Consumption) on a Laptop and i would never buy a I7 laptop with Intel graphics(Always less then the competition per dollar plus worse driver support).

    I would of never gotten a laptop 3 years ago because of bad graphics performance or high priced gaming laptops now i can game on a 500$ A8 Llano and play everything fine with Great power consumption(4 hours of sims 3 on the battery or 5-6 hours web).

    Anyways if you want to max games out use a desktop if you want to play a game for fun on the go get a APU.
  • 0 Hide
    zeratul600 , July 1, 2012 6:57 PM
    people is so stupid buying those slow things, those thin pc are like the stupid blonde girl stereoptype, beautiful on the outside hollow on the inside, there is no way that those pc can compete in powe against a regular sized laptop, so why buy something that look like mac product? just because of it looks? that sounds stupid to me!
    john_4Wouldn't mind having one to put Ubuntu on it. Wipe off the MS infection is always the first thing I do with a new laptop if it isn't an Apple.
    that is funny!!! apple its a worst infection than MS... check the size of the company to see which infection it more spread
  • 1 Hide
    TinKicker , July 1, 2012 7:17 PM
    I don't understand fanboys of ANY type who buy products based on the name behind it. Every PC I've owned since 1995 was an AMD because of the price/performance advantage, up until the one I drive now which is an i5-2500k beast. But if Intel had been in the dominant price/performance category back in the older days, that's what I would have owned.
    What, do you own stock in these particular companies? If you do, I can at least partially understand, though I still can't see why even if I owned stock in AMD I would buy a slower computer on purpose. I would buy the faster Intel and sell my AMD stock. Do you LIKE being inefficient?
    Same as with vehicles, like somebody touched on. I've owned all big three brands, my guiding principal being "what's the best vehicle for me". It's never mattered to me to be in the "Ford" club or the "Chevy" club or whatever just because granddad was. For Pete's sake, granddad made mistakes too! Think for yourselves! Stop being so insecure that you have to belong to some group to be recognized.
    I'm just waiting for the Yellow Dog political folks to chime in. Idiots led around by the nose.
    Now...does anybody want to talk about computers?
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , July 1, 2012 7:26 PM
    QUOTE: "Under Normal conditions and testing Trinity is 30% faster then the 4000HD graphics from Intel now Llano and Ivy are about even but Llano still has a 5-10% edge not to mention Superior drivers.

    Now under normal CPU use No one in their right mind can tell a difference between a Ivy I3 or I5 vs a Trinity A10. Not to mention OpenCL is really taking off and this is making Trinity a better option when compared to a I5 or I3 ivy on price wise. Not to mention it should be priced in the 650$ market or below. Of course for 800$ a A10 is crap but for 650$ its a pretty good deal.

    What do people even do on their laptops facebook, browsing the web? Liston to music or watch 1080P Netflix videos or play a nice games of the sims or some WoW. Or do people run CS5 benchmarks?

    I would personally never buy a I7+Graphics card(Power Consumption) on a Laptop and i would never buy a I7 laptop with Intel graphics(Always less then the competition per dollar plus worse driver support).

    I would of never gotten a laptop 3 years ago because of bad graphics performance or high priced gaming laptops now i can game on a 500$ A8 Llano and play everything fine with Great power consumption(4 hours of sims 3 on the battery or 5-6 hours web).

    Anyways if you want to max games out use a desktop if you want to play a game for fun on the go get a APU. "
    -----------------------------------------------

    It wasn't just the CS5 benchmarks unfortunately. Most all other benchmarks showed an enormous gap between Trinity and Ivy Bridge. I personally run Visual Studio 10 and there is a huge gap in performance between the two. I don't know what most people do with their PCs as you have stated, but I do know about value. I know if 1 is a great deal faster than the other, then I'm buying the one that is a great deal faster unless it is abnormally expensive. As for the graphics, I have seen the Anand benchmarks so I am going with Anand rather than your posted numbers for the sake of actual results. Superior drivers doesn't mean jack if it is slower.

    As for OpenCL, both companies do OpenCL. OpenCL is not really taking off like you said. In fact, I have no OpenCL accelerated programs yet you act like they are as common place as a browser. Very few applications (less than two hand fulls) are OpenCL accelerated. It is no different, really, than Intel's own video acceleration technology which is supported by Expresso amongst the other few apps. Both have very little support but look good in "custom" benchmarks (something you complained about). So in no way, shape, or form does OpenCL make Trinity a better value when both have it and it is not supported... certainly not by ANY OF THE APPS YOU MENTIONED AS APPS MOST PEOPLE USE.

    Basically, you are in the minority jwii which is why people are buying the Intel solution by the bucket load. Benchmarks show that on the mobile side, HD4000 is very competitive with Trinity and at 17W might actually be the better solution. Personally, I don't play Diablo so CPU performance is my main goal. The CPU is going to make the most difference in the programs that I use and hard drive second. If you look at the apps that are the most popular around the internet (most often downloaded), that is the case with MOST people. Buying an Intel solution with an SSD is going to get you further than an AMD system right now. That is an unmitigated fact except for those hanging on to a legacy much like people driving old cars.


  • -1 Hide
    jdwii , July 1, 2012 7:53 PM
    I'll have to say you made some good points but i must say OpenCL will work on HandBrake and the performance benefit is huge, again i must say most people don't do what you do i guessing its basic things and when their not doing basic things such as web browsing their Watching a Video or playing a game, Both of which will get you more performance on a Trinity vs a I5 or I7 with Intel graphics.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-4600m-trinity-piledriver,3202-16.html

    OpenCL programs and YES people do use VLC player and Photoshop! Also HandBrake is like the most popular encoding software. So yes Opencl is taking off.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5835/testing-opencl-accelerated-handbrakex264-with-amds-trinity-apu

    Of course a 650$ laptop is not going to beat a 900$ I7 Laptop on these tasks but Opencl helps. Not to mention Intel 4000 HD graphics are not going to be on every laptop they will probably put something worse. So lets say their equal on graphics performance (even though the more you push the settings Ivy lags more and more) they sure wont be equal on price.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5831/amd-trinity-review-a10-4600m-a-new-hope/6

    On average its about 20% faster and at times its over 50%! That is a HUGE difference.
Display more comments