Da_SyEnTisTSorry but thats not true at all.

a LOT of Intel ultrabooks on the market come with only 1 stick of ram, and even worse, there are no other sodimm slot, so you cannot even run in dual channel even if you want to.

My workplace bought some ThinkPad x270 notebook, and it's a single slot motherboard ... I was not very happy to find that out.

Also found out a lot of Asus and HP ultrabook are single slotted or even worse, some model have the ram soldered on-board in a single channel config.

Unfortunately, dual channel option is starting to dissapear in ultrabooks

The issue is that Intel doesn't really lose anything by going single channel. If the argument for buying AMD instead centers around the superior IGPU, that makes them utterly dependent on memory bandwidth to live up to that expectation. Heck, even Intel's anemic HD Graphics see massive gains from increased memory bandwidth. If Intel is the de facto "good all-round performance" leader, they don't necessarily need dual channel memory to maintain this status as most workloads don't need dual channel memory - and their iGPUs are sh*t, but passable enough for desktop use. I would gladly use an Intel-based Lenovo X270 despite single channel memory, but not if it had Raven Ridge on board, as that would choke the GPU completely.

Da_SyEnTisTSorry but thats not true at all.

a LOT of Intel ultrabooks on the market come with only 1 stick of ram, and even worse, there are no other sodimm slot, so you cannot even run in dual channel even if you want to.

My workplace bought some ThinkPad x270 notebook, and it's a single slot motherboard ... I was not very happy to find that out.

Also found out a lot of Asus and HP ultrabook are single slotted or even worse, some model have the ram soldered on-board in a single channel config.

Unfortunately, dual channel option is starting to dissapear in ultrabooks

Some ASUS Ultrabooks comes standard with fixed onboard memory + a single SODIMM slot, but IDK if occupying the SODIMM slot will make it dual channel or not.

ValantarThe issue is that Intel doesn't really lose anything by going single channel. If the argument for buying AMD instead centers around the superior IGPU, that makes them utterly dependent on memory bandwidth to live up to that expectation. Heck, even Intel's anemic HD Graphics see massive gains from increased memory bandwidth. If Intel is the de facto "good all-round performance" leader, they don't necessarily need dual channel memory to maintain this status as most workloads don't need dual channel memory - and their iGPUs are sh*t, but passable enough for desktop use. I would gladly use an Intel-based Lenovo X270 despite single channel memory, but not if it had Raven Ridge on board, as that would choke the GPU completely.

Raven Ridge will need dual channel for thrashing intel in games not for being competitive. I hope you haven't forgotten that.

prtskgRaven Ridge will need dual channel for thrashing intel in games not for being competitive. I hope you haven't forgotten that.

Did you even read my post? To quote myself: "If the argument for buying AMD instead centers around the superior IGPU, that makes them utterly dependent on memory bandwidth to live up to that expectation." That pretty much sums it up, no?

ValantarDid you even read my post? To quote myself: "If the argument for buying AMD instead centers around the superior IGPU, that makes them utterly dependent on memory bandwidth to live up to that expectation." That pretty much sums it up, no?

Raven will be competitive even with single channel ram. That's enough for now.

prtskgRaven will be competitive even with single channel ram. That's enough for now.

If it's "competitive" with Intel, it has lost. That iGPU should, on paper, be 3x more powerful, trouncing Intel's iGPUs completely. Unfortunately, single-channel memory might erase most, if not all, of that lead. In which case, AMD goes back to being "the cheap option" - which is good for nobody.

ValantarIf it's "competitive" with Intel, it has lost.

That's your personal view.

prtskgThat's your personal view.

Unfortunately, no. Intel has a massive marketshare and mindshare advantage in the laptop market - even more than in PCs in general. As such, any sales pitch that boils down to "this is just as good, but from another brand" is going to be pretty much dead in the water. People (are dumb enough to) assume that market leaders are in that position for a "fair" reason (as opposed to, say, a decades-long history of massive antitrust fines and other crimes), and competitors are viewed with surprising skepticism. I have enough retail work experience to know this for a fact. It might work if the competing product is significantly cheaper, but if it's $100 or less off a $1000 laptop, it's not going to make a difference. Heck, I have made gargantuan efforts to convince people to buy a Huawei phone that I know would serve their needs just as well as a Samsung at double the price - and have often failed. "The customer is always right" is a logical fallacy of epic proportions. Now, of course I'm not talking enthusiasts here - after all, we make up a tiny, tiny portion of the PC-buying demographic. For Joe or Jane Blow, you'd have to present a very compelling argument for them to choose a non-Intel-based PC if the choice is between two otherwise identical options. That's the sad reality.

For me, as long as Lenovo releases a convertible ThinkPad with Raven Ridge on board in the coming year, I'm all in. If not, I'll have to consider my priorities (RR graphics, pen input, ThinkPad keyboard and build quality - which is more important to me?)

ValantarPeople (are dumb enough to)

Dumb people are just that.

Now, of course I'm not talking enthusiasts here

I'm talking about those people here who are enthusiast or reasonable.

prtskgDumb people are just that.

I'm talking about those people here who are enthusiast or reasonable.

Well, then it's no wonder we keep talking past each other. I'm talking of the market as a whole, you're talking about a rather small fraction of it.

ValantarWell, then it's no wonder we keep talking past each other. I'm talking of the market as a whole, you're talking about a rather small fraction of it.

Reputation is very important if AMD wants to enter every home. Being good for a generation isn't enough for that. AMD will have to perform good for several generation to reach that level. Intel and Nvidia has that kind of following at the moment. AMD is far from that level at the moment.