I've heard many people comparing the TDP of the Intel solution tested in the article (i7-4500U & Nvidia Geforce 750M) to the new APU tested.
The 15W reported by Intel is not directly comparable to the 35W claimed by AMD. The APU includes, among others, the more powerful GPU on the CPU die, which is handled on the Intel system in the benchmarks by the Nvidia card. The power budget of the Nvidia is not included in the 15W figure.
The methodology used to derive these TDP specs is also not known and likely differs between the manufacturers.
The only proper way to compare the power consumption would be to do a full system power measurement of two comparable devices.
DDR are POP soldered on top of SOC directly - similar to raspberry pie's SOC's RAM.
The power are way lower.
All package (With DDR) in size of the thumbnail. A PCB with SOC + EMMC (Flash) + PMIC + Wifi is size of the postage stamp.
And they are selling billions of them every year.
It is amaze how far ahead of for ARM SOC as compare to x86 camp. (In my point of view.)
In more ways than TDP.
I run an i7 4500 in my laptop (same as the one in the article), and my parents have a desktop APU comparable to the one presented here. Their GPU's are not in the same ballpark. Intel does have powerful GPU's now, but they are only available in CPU's of 47W and up, and at a much steeper price as well. (Price is unrelated to my previous argument, but I'm pretty confident that the price per part of an AMD A7600 will be far below that of the i7-4500u)
Also, for the benchmarks presented here, we have no details about actually consumed energy by the devices, and we don't know what the devices consume during "typical" usage either.
AMD needs to basically own the $500-800 space with a good APU, SSD, and outstanding form factor. Basically if they could make a 13" Macbook Air with one of these CPU's for around $500-750 they would have a winner on their hands.
I fully expect that to not happen.
The MBA is nice and all, but has an absolutely godawful screen compared to everything else in its price segment, especially if you bump up above base specs.
PC laptops with decent displays don't seem to exist below around the $900-1000 mark currently. I don't need an i7 in a notebook, but shopping around, it's been the only way for me to get something with the SSD and 8GB of RAM that I do need.
It seems that to get a SSD in a Windows laptop, I need to either spend $1,000 or buy a decently spec'ed $500-700 laptop, and drop in my own SSD for $100.
I don't think customers are going to appreciate the confusion.
