Asus Pitches a $799 Entry-level Ultrabook
Asus has unveiled an ultrabook with a launch price that targets the upper end of the mainstream market.
The UX32VD will carry a suggested retail price of $799, including an Intel Ivy Bridge Core i5-3317U processor. However, this may not be the breakthrough for ultrabooks that Intel is waiting for.
The 1.7 GHz (17 watt) processor, GeForce GT620M graphics chip, and hybrid storage (500 GB HDD, 24 GB SSD) put this ultrabook square in the entry-level segment with a price tag that represents a $200 premium over a comparable traditional notebooks currently on the market. Intel is hoping to break the $700 barrier for ultrabooks this year, but there is clearly some tension as PC makers are complaining about high CPU prices and Intel's unwillingness to hand out more discounts.
If PC makers are compromising on the build quality and essential components of such devices, it is rather unlikely that consumers will bite.

By the time Intel does lowers their prices I'll be to late, cause people will have moved on to AMD's lower price ultrathin. Why spend a lot of money and get a fast processor and a slow gpu when you can spend less money and get a moderate speed processor and a fast gpu.
By the time Intel does lowers their prices I'll be to late, cause people will have moved on to AMD's lower price ultrathin. Why spend a lot of money and get a fast processor and a slow gpu when you can spend less money and get a moderate speed processor and a fast gpu.
I somehow don't know why anyone would use these ultra-portables for gaming, though. I've seen normal (and cheaper) notebooks face heat issues while gaming. Gaming notebooks exist for a reason...
I bet it would only cost Asus an extra $2 to put in a decent res screen. Why do they keep spoiling nice kit with crappy cheap screens? You spend a fortune developing a nice case etc. but then spoil it all by skimping on the main part we look at.
Madness.
This is a notebook. The current HD4000 is faster than current AMD Llano GPU. Trinity will probably be faster but how much is not known right now. Calling HD4000 slow on the mobile side though is disengenuous. It is the best thing out right now. The CPU side is light years ahead in speed on the mobile side and Trinity doesn't seem to close any ground at first review. Thus, you are likely buying a much slower platform. You will likely pay less, but will the platform offer Thunderbolt and an SSD? What will the battery life be like? People will buy cheap, but they will receive cheap at the same time. $799 actually isn't bad if the battery life is good.
what about the battery life, and GPGPU, and the cost ...... AMD combine it in one single chip, this is what intel or nvidia don't have at the moment.
People are buying Lano now because its integrated gpu more than makes up for being slower on the cpu side. HD4000 is not faster than Lano, do some research you might be comparing the desktop i7 HD4000 to the Mobile Lano which you would not see in an Ultrabook. CPUs now are all more than powerful enough for even moderate heavy users and certainly for gamers. It is the GPU that even light users crave more of. If you have been following Tom's recommendations for the past 4 years you will see they always recommend to save cash on the CPU side and put it towards the GPU side.
Also Intel does need to lower their prices by say 10-15%. How can they expect a PC with the same thickness as Mac, nearly same or better hardware, similar level aesthetics, while paying for full version of windows and still be substantially cheaper than MacBook Air so that large no. of people will buy them...JUST HOW??
if so... why don't they just use the brazos C-60, is good enough for all the things u mentioned, or u can even gaming on the brazos E-450, and is cheap!
You're totally wrong. Intel HD4000 is way and i mean wayyyyyyyyyyyy slow than Llano IGP.
Do you realize that you're comparing a top of line IB quad with high cpu frequency with a Llano that is clocked below 2Ghz? I can assure that most of that "reviews" are with uber-low details and uber-low resolution. In that case the cpu matters a lot so the IGP battle is totally wrong.
It's the same when they compare an over $300 SB 3770K vs a $120 A8 3870K with 800x600/1024x768 low details. That intel "gpu" seems to be faster than it is, but is a flawed result. Even with that, Llano is FASTER.
And you don't buy a top of line IB i7 mobile to use with it's craptastic gpu.
Now compare what the average dual core SB/IB does and you will see they get destroyed by Llano. Mind you that the ULV 17 IB/SB have a castrated GPU and lose more than half of the performance on a regular dual core.
FACT:
SB/IB are no competition for Llano in gpu, and Trinity is even better than Llano (50%+ for mobile).
GT620M is a crappy gpu, way slower than the GT540M. Trinity modile is as fast as a GT540M.
17-25w ULV Trinity offers more with less powerconsumption. A winner there, unless intel threatens OEM'S like before, the AMD APU's should be the only option if they want to make money,
Here is one review: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000-Benchmarked.73567.0.html
"Intel has the upper hand by about 15 percent or more compared to AMD's Fusion Llano offerings."
Outside of DX11, the HD4000 actually performs very well on the mobile side.
"FACT:
SB/IB are no competition for Llano in gpu, and Trinity is even better than Llano (50%+ for mobile)."
FACT: You have no clue what a fact is.
"Outside of DX11, the HD4000 actually performs very well on the mobile side."
Of course! Intel only loses on the one graphics standard everyone uses!"
From the review:
"Sandy Bridge processors provided excellent performance, great battery life, and reasonable graphics for most uses outside of gaming"
The only way Intel "wins" is by using Optimus technology to switch to an external GPU when do anything like HD media playback or gaming. As an owner of a laptop with Optimus technology, I will say this; NEVER, EVER again. It's the most half-baked, obnoxious technology to ever come out of Nvidia. It sucks the big one. Now I try not to switch over to the external GPU even though things would run smoother because I'm tired of my programs crashing and my windows resizing every.time.I.plug.it.in.
The price difference between the cpu isn't that great. The bulk of the couple hundred dollar difference between ultrabooks and AMD's ultrathins comes from cutting features.