That comment makes no sense. MacBook Air is faster than the current generation 13 inch MacBook Pro because of the SSD and is only 10% slower in processing speed:

http://www.computerbase.d...ook-air-vs-macbook-pro/9/

Not to mention Ultrabooks such as the Asus X32 and MBA series have better trackpads and screens than 95% of all laptops out there.

Maybe you have no idea what Ultrabooks are? The fact that almost all Ultrabooks have SSDs already makes them head and shoulders faster in every day feel than pretty much all laptops. And Ultrabooks aren't for gaming. They are supposed to be thin and light, but have nothing in common with underpowered, cheap/flimsy/plasticky netbooks with their garage screens.

Kindly post some number if Trinity Selling well.

I Hope its not from SemiAccurate cause they mostly criticize or flamed improvement by Intel. which cannot be trusted

Only Thing Trinity APU stand is GPU power.Do Spreedshet. Surfing web Requires much GPU Power?

Heres a Site http://www.tomshardware.c...00k-trinity-apu,3241.html

Intel i3 Sandy Bridge vs AMD A8 Trinity

Read post above. As usual, your comments continue to contradict real world data. Ultrabooks are pretty fast because they have SSDs and their CPUs are not much slower than full fledged laptops unless you go quad-core (already proven in the MacBook Pro 13 inch vs. MBA 13 inch comparison of their CPUs by Computerbase).

If you need a quad-core laptop with a powerful GPU, then you don't care for a thin and light laptop (i.e. you don't understand the entire point behind Ultrabooks).

Your comment is akin to saying that a Lotus Elise/Exige can't carry as much load as a Ford F150. Duh! It's not designed for that task. Asking Ultrabooks to render CineBench at 3960X speed, or to max out Crysis 2 at 1080P is ludicrous. For what they are, nothing even comes close in terms of performance vs. price vs. size/weight/battery life. Also, you totally ignored the overall user experience (screen, keyboard, construction materials, trackpads).

If you want to lug around a 1.7 inch thick Alienware 17x/18x that weighs > 9 lbs, good for you!

Performance wise, Core i5/i7 ultrabooks slaughter Trinity in almost everything besides gaming. Granted, the gaming on Trinity is the only technical advantage it has. Until AMD has premium, portable/light laptops made of good quality materials, with good trackpads, keyboards, 128GB SSD standard and great screens, it's a moot point.

Trinity competes in the budget space. The APU (GPU) in it has already been shown to be barely adequate to run basic games such as Diablo 3 anyway. Both are too slow for any serious gamer if you want to be realistic about it.

I think you still don't understand the point of an Ultrabook. If you think Core i5/i7 with an SSD is underpowered, then Trinity would be completely inadequate, strapped with mechanical drive and even slower CPU performance.

Honestly, you are turning into Wreckage, Warrior_247, Rollo style character for AMD. Even the barebones GT630M Kepler beats the fastest Trinity APU on the market for games:

http://www.anandtech.com/...-diablo-iii-performance/3

Anyone who even cares about gaming isn't buying a Trinity-based laptop. They are buying an Intel laptop + Kepler/HD7000 series discrete GPU.

Where do they find so many biased uninformed AMD fanboys?

Trinity + HD7660G cannot even run Diablo 3 at 30 fps at 1080P. It can only achieve 19-20 fps (unplayable):

http://www.anandtech.com/...-diablo-iii-performance/3

The worst Kepler GPU is faster...

Something like a GT650M is 2x faster.

And what does Linus Torvalds have anything to do with how good a GPU is for games? Linux OS is useless for gaming anyway and what has that guy ever done that's changed the world? There are countless things NV has done for the gaming and GPU hardware industry that made ATI/AMD's graphics division better for it too.

Why should NV work on Linux? Almost no one uses it. That's like asking Casio's calculator division to work closely with an abacus manufacturer to improve the abacus that 30 people in the world use.