I would really appreciate having that back too. It isn't like I particularly care from a user perspective (obviously overall battery life is more important), but I really like to see how different platforms stack up in this regard.
No idea why i even clicked , Core M is a horrible product for the price so got no interest at all in anything with it - hopefully AMD. Nvidia ,Qualcomm and ARM will catch up in single threaded perf at a fraction of the price soon. Well,maybe not ARM since A72 seems to be actually smaller than A57 , die size wise. Anyway this actually made me laugh when i realized that it kinda looks like the Moto Xoom except with thicker bezels (first Android tab ,4 years ago). OEMs should put more effort than this even in 100$ tabs.
Apple managed a giant 10% improvement in single core performance between A7 and A8... So with the top Core M single core performance around 60% higher than the A8X, Apple will need to produce a miracle.
And as for the cost, a 128gb iPad Air 2 is $699+$100 for a decent keyboard case versus the low end core M equipped Asus T300 Chi which comes with a keyboard for $699. And the high end T300Chi, which will obliterate the iPAd Air 2 comes in at $899 with 8GB of memory
Apple has a lot of relevance here, because they've got the ARM core with the highest single threaded performance. If anyone closes the gap to Intel it's going to be them. Even if Qualcom could do it, they need to put 4 cores into phones for the "bigger is better" crowd, which means any single core must not be too big - otherwise people will complain that it gets too hot.
And if Apple only got 10% on their last refresh they may be approaching the region of diminishing returns that Intel and AMD have long been in. It's easy to improve & grow when you start from nothing, but an entirely different matter once you look at mature technology.
Apple is not a reasonable purchase so it doesn't matter, even if they have 2 times the perf it's not relevant in the real world. It is true that the Android guys do need more cores in general but it's also true that Intel doesn't design it's cores for this kind of TDP. And do remember to compare sustained perf and burst perf. I don't know for sure the core size for Broadwell on Intel's 14nm or A57 on 14nm Samsung but likely 7mm2+ vs bellow 2mm2 so A57 must be some 4 times smaller. For Apple 2 cores plus cache are some 12.5mm2 on 20nm TSMC but the cache is not very die efficient and on 14nm Samsung the 12.5mm2 would be closer to 10.5mm. For A72 ARM claimed 2.4GHz sustained clocks on 16nmFF+ in phones and it appears they mean quad cores. It also appears that A72 is smaller than A57. The numbers i've seen were core size 3.3mm2 , quad cluster(so with cache) 18.7mm2 but not certain about process, i believe it's on 28nm but that could be wrong. A72 at 2.4GHz should be pretty good and it remains to be seen what's the burst perf and how it clocks at higher TDP. It's not impossible for it to be close enough in tabs. We should see the dual A72 @ 2.4GHz on 28nm from Mediatek soon in tabs (some early benchmarks are in the wild already) and later this year the Qualcomm midrange phone SoCs with A72 at 1.9GHz and that will give us a better idea about what kind of clocks would be needed on 16FF+ and 14nm. Qualcomm's custom core must beat A72 or there is no point in using it and that's the case with all the other custom cores from AMD, Nvidia, Samsung and whatever else comes.
This seems like an overly strong statement ("horrible!" -- for the price).
Core M is a low-power platform. For standard office productivity tasks, it provides similar performance to 15 watt ultrabook processors, but only uses 4.5 watts of power. That's pretty impressive. I don't see where the "horrible" part comes into play. These are meant to be ultramobile parts. The laws of physics dictate that there will be some tradeoff between power consumption and performance when you are constrained by thermal limits and battery capacity.
-If you don't like Core M, choose a product built around a higher TDP platform and move to the other side of the curve (higher power consumption, but also consistently higher performance in continuous workloads). -If you want a snappy system for standard office productivity tasks in the most mobile form-factor possible, choose a Core M product, and enjoy similar performance to 15 watt parts for "burst" oriented workloads, but in a thinner, lighter, longer-lasting form factor. -If you want a cheaper price point, choose a slower product built around an Atom processor, which will offer a similar form factor but lower performance. -And if you can live without Windows, sure, buy an ARM-based tablet.
** It's fantastic that we have these choices today. ** If your problem is the price of Core M, well, unfortunately we are talking about full-on Core architecture processors. Without greater competition, Intel isn't going to give these processors away at Atom prices. And especially not at ARM prices.
As for this particular product, I agree it does't look very "premium" to me, either, that has nothing to do with the Core M processor inside. I'm personally impressed with what Asus did with the UX305 for $699 and a Core M processor. Solid ultra-portable performance in a very thin chassis with long battery life.
Didn't mean to jump on you here. Just sort of surprised that anyone would call Core M itself horrible. Many people have been waiting for this kind of performance in such a low TDP x86 processor.
Apple have the resources that they presumably could (more or less) match the CPU single core of this, but I don't think putting so much single core performance into a tablet chip is what you'd chose to do if designing specifically for tablets.
Especially with Apple being very keen on having lots and lots of graphics firepower to hand.
CoreM's design makes much more sense if you're going for fanless notebooks, at times with the cooling systems around to run it at somewhat higher power than you'd want for a tablet etc.
Sorry, but no. Core M doesn't gives you the performance of a 15w ultrabook using only 4.5watts.
Because it can only give you that for short bursts before seriously throttling and having to lower its clock from 2,8Ghz (turbo) to its nominal 1Ghz frequency, the only one they can keep for large periods.
Don't try anything that needs steady performance on a Core M, like gaming, for example.
I don't mean to be rude, but I don't think you read my post or the article itself very carefully. My post says that for typical office productivity tasks, which are burst-oriented, you get similar performance. I also say that if you want sustained higher performance, you need to move to a higher TDP. The article says similar things and shows benchmarks to demonstrate this. So what exactly are you arguing that I didn't say myself?
My Post: "For standard office productivity tasks, it provides similar performance to 15 watt ultrabook processors, but only uses 4.5 watts of power. ...choose a Core M product, and enjoy similar performance to 15 watt parts for "burst" oriented workloads, but in a thinner, lighter, longer-lasting form factor."
Article: In the PCMark 8 section, which simulates office productivity tasks -- "In these types of workloads, Core M can outperform [15 watt TDP] Haswell-U series parts from the Ultrabooks of last year, which is fairly impressive in a passively cooled device."
To "jjj", you still haven't provided a sensible argument. I'd love it if Intel sold these chips for $50, but it isn't going to happen. You'd have to be living on another planet to think otherwise. Until someone else offers similar x86 CPU performance in a comparable power envelope, these products are going to command prices that are similar to Intel's other Core series processors.
It's the worst chip in history!! lol Let me explain why and remember i said horrible for the price. Die is about 80mm2 so similar to the Exynos 7420 and 50% smaller than a Snapdragon801. Sure it comes on a module so that adds to costs a bit but Intel launched it at some 280$. Even if an OEM would pay 3 times less ,the chip would still cost way way too much. Mobile chips that size sell for 15-30$ depending on how new they are (start at 30 and keep dropping during their lifetime), IHS just a couple of days ago estimated that the Exynos 7420 costs 29.5$ ( to buy not to make). So Intel here is just abusing it's x86 monopoly and charging absurd prices for the chip. That's why we don't see tabs like this one at 300$ and why the chip is horrible. If it was below 50$ it would be fine but it's a hell of a lot more.
PS: you can check die size and price in one of the early articles on Core M here on AT.
Not even a trace of anger ,i know Intel's ways too well for it's behavior to impress me and i can afford it but i'm not that stupid to buy it (not that i need it to begin with). Anyway , thanks for your valuable contribution to the conversation , it was a true delight.
Excellent words 'crow. I'm thinking jjj doesn't understand X86, ARM, and bigLittle architecture NOR how a mobile processor is 'of benefit' to MOST people in today's world. They're as fast as the core i5 power in SB, close to IB and even with thermal limitations, it smokes the Intel iGPU 4000. I'm ambidextrous, using OS X and Windows Android and iOS. To exclaim 'the worst chip in history' considering where Intel was just 18 months ago VERY WELL be the MOST ignorant statement I've seen on Anand's site in some time. Regardless of price (remember, R&D must be recouped to bring the archtiecture's price down), and the magic Apple's done with 64 bit processing over the past two years, it's Qualcomm that's been blindsided. Samsung has switched to their chips, has the A9 contract and have settled disputes everywhere but America. The power of samsung and Apple's engineering prowess and chip trickery (A8x and A8, second and 2.5 gen 64bit chips are nearing a year old, as they start production early summer on the fall iOS releases), it's Intel and Apple/Samsung and TSMC. What the A8/A8x did for the iPad Air 2 is. Itching short of incredible and as an owner for almost nine months, I'm confident there are very few folks in this world that need 'more power' than iPad Air2, Nexus 9, or this Dell reviewed. Most of us that 'work' with a company supplied computer don't really feel like desktops when we get home. Don't have time with the kids and it's easy to throw in the truck and forget about the charger! Laptops are a PITA in comparison and not 'really' that much more capable ESPECIALLY if you use the tools built for and sold I the App Store. Every app of the million plus are optimized at this time for the A5/6 families of SoCs. That's the missing point here. With this Dell, the entire world of software 'Windows built' is now available to you with significantly faster storage and a mature 64bit process from a company that's led the way in silicon for thirty years. And they, like Apple, have the paper to test, retest and 'make it work'. Tegra. Tegra 3, 4 and now these ULV procs taking it to an entirely different level of performance With the iGPU it's a matter of efficient cooling in fabless designs to slow down the throttling. That's going to come as they continue the more efficient designs with Skylake and the future. Just plain ignorance. So sad with all these power packed choices we've got now, their time is limited. Not enough room for a half dozen silicon manufacturers. 2, maybe three will win out and my bets on ARM, Intel and possibly Sammys Exnyos
Well Said! I'm not going to buy Core M because I value performance over mobility - yet this doesn't make it a bad product. If you want maximum performance at high mobility, nothing comes close to Core M.
Core M is in fact a new cpu category on it's own, a cpu that resembles the single core performance of "core" cpus while in the Atoms' TDP envelope (at least before it throttles!). But, as with every new product, it's overpriced at launch. Wait for the Skylake release, I say.
The M-5Y71 is the same price as the i5-4300U in my laptop with the same base & turbo boost clocks for the CPU. Given the same cooling as my laptop has it should perform very similarly for CPU loads. Not fussed about GPU loads so haven't focussed on that but seemingly it will struggle to match the U series when both are stressed.
A category where they can only keep this performance for short bursts before having to low their frequency from 2,8Ghz (turbo) to their nominal 1Ghz (where you don't get any much performance than on a simple Atom).
Even in the benchmarks, where sustained performance is necessary, Core-M is some 25% slower compared to 15W Broadwell. ONLY.
This effectively means, that if task is pain on Core-M, it will be pain on 15W Broadwell as well. I.e. if some task is not snappy and requires waiting on Core-M, it requires waiting on Broadwell as well. And only desktop class chips may have the oomph to be significantly faster.
I do not count in games, but nobody considers Broadwell-U gaming SoC either.
If you had read the recent detailed Anandtech overview of Core M you would see that is a fallacy. I was surprised how well Core M does in a fanless laptop versus one with a Broadwell i5 that is fan cooled. And even more how well it does in a tablet where surface temperate is more of an issue so throttling is more prevalent. A Core M-5Y71 in my Latitude E7440 with a slightly beefier cooler would I imagine come close to my i5-4300U even for extended loads. This is purely for CPU loads as the GPU is another issue that doesn’t concern me.
When it throttles it's actually entering Atoms TDP envelope. Before that it's allowed to use more power for short periods. That's the whole point of a Thermal Design Power.
If by soon you mean years from now sure. Right now the speed comparison has a huge gulf between Core M and everything else in that power range. I really don't get how people manage to keep making predictions this bad. It's probably because they decide before reading about what they're talking about.
The Denver core is odd but it's not that far behind is some situations even on 28nm.If they tune it further and goes 14nm things would get a lot better. AMD we have no clue where it lands, Qualcomm's new core got to be faster than A72 and A72 is pretty fast. Apple even with just a shrink to 14mm wouldn't be that far behind. So when i said soon i meant soon. After all Core M has big cores clocked way low, shouldn't be that hard to beat it since the core is likely outside it's optimal range.Someone that would design the core for such a TDP would have a big advantage.
If you're fine with the performance and software collection those cheap ARM SoC's can offer you - fine, but then compare to Silvermont rather than Core M. Having ultra mobily performance and x86 is worth a lot to some people. Let the market decide if it's enough to warrant such a product.
...? Apple's MacBook? With a phenomenal display, the fastest storage available, 256GB PCIe storage solutions and less than a Kg? Is there a hiDPI computer running Win 8(,1/10) you can point to that is achieving what Apple has with its MacBook (again, brand new, the R&D costs recovered and you've got quick price breaks with a phenomenal operating system that works seamlessly to aggregate and integrate with your mobile devices, and continuity with Handoff ...and you can run Windows!). The trackpad, the new keyboard. ARS isn't known to be an Apple fans paradise but it's a great review, phenomenal display, ultra light (he compares with a 11" MBA), fast as hell and incredible battery life. Nice to leave the Chargers and wires at home. It's a 'second' laptop solution to most and to those as a primary ownership computer, I'm sure they're not rendering Pro-Res from an HDV codec and transcoding video for 'speed'. They're checking Facebook, Twitter, email and surfing. Word processing and media enjoyment. For these tasks alone, it's prefect (& able to run 4k @ 30hZ. Not bad) as their solo computer. Makes me laugh as my wife was using the MacBook core 2 duo 2007 @ 2.16GHz/2GB/120GB spinner until two years ago. Bought the MBA for her in 2011 and it's still kicking ass and it's what SHE needs (she's a twenty two year pilot in Alaska me uses iPads and the MBA for flight planning and navigation, a test system (NextGen) with the FAA using three dimensional terrain, weather and traffic information, flight planning and diversion, real time weather and traffic, NFZs or other advisories. The LAST thing she wants at home is a four pound laptop or two pond tablet at home for enjoyment when she's not at work ...me, I run the business side and we concentrate on audio and visual production across the state of Alaska. Until a year ago I was dumping P2 cards off to a 15" PowerBook because of the perfect PCMICA slot, with FCP7, field edits and hacks were easily tackled. Now with less pricey proprietary transfer and encoding we've switched to rMBPs solely in the field and a pair of MacPros at the studio. I need the power to finalize but she's doing all the heavy lifting and safety with MUCH less power but significantly better battery life than the tools I use. I've every intention of buying one when they hit for her. It's a helluva laptop
Fastest storage available? You do know that most companies just put some random SSD into their tablets, laptops, etc. Usually some cheap value brand to save on costs. Hardly the fastest available storage. If it was, aftermarket SSD companies wouldn't be making bookoo dollars.
As for comparison, really. Have you not even seen a Surface Pro 3? The thing spanks the Macbook in performance, all while being a year older. Now there are pros and cons for both, where a user's usage will dictate which is the better purchase for their needs.
The Surface Pro 3 is both thicker and thinner than the Macbook. It's also lighter and heavier than the Macbook. Depends on whether you add in the keyboard.
SP3 is MB share the same battery life, but expect the MB to loose if you bootcamp, cause you know the thing's battery life goes a bit down the drain when it tries to run Windows.
PPI screens are comparable, with the MB a little better. At the same time, the SP3 is a touchscreen and has an awesome stylus.
Performance, SP3 wins that easily, but it also costs more, if you configure it to have the same storage option as the MB.
MB has a port. SP3 has multiple ports for expanding. Including the microSD slot to add more storage.
MB has the better keyboard. Not much contest with the SP3's type cover.
If you're looking for more downright power in a very portable package, the SP3 is the better bet over the MB.
I have a couple of the previous models of this tablet, and use them with the dock and external monitors. I can't spear for 4k, but one of them is outputting to a 2560x1440p monitor, but when using the dock, this limits the overall max output on a 2nd external monitor. To be able to output anything higher than 1080p while also outputting 1440p, I have to connect the 2nd external display to the tablet itself (not the dock). So just an assumption based on this, I would imagine if you output to a 4k external monitor, you may not have the flexibility to also output to a 2nd external monitor, if that's something you were interested in.
Also, good review, but just a note that they released a new backwards-compatible dock for this new model that has gigabit Ethernet. I wonder if the new dock also resolves the display output limitations.
I have a couple of the previous models of this tablet, and use them with the dock and external monitors. I can't spear for 4k, but one of them is outputting to a 2560x1440p monitor, but when using the dock, this limits the overall max output on a 2nd external monitor. To be able to output anything higher than 1080p while also outputting 1440p, I have to connect the 2nd external display to the tablet itself (not the dock). So just an assumption based on this, I would imagine if you output to a 4k external monitor, you may not have the flexibility to also output to a 2nd external monitor, if that's something you were interested in.
Also, good review, but just a note that they released a new backwards-compatible dock for this new model that has gigabit Ethernet. I wonder if the new dock also resolves the display output limitations.
My God, after all these years, and at that price you'd think that Intel would get the GPU right, especially when you look at the comparative size in the die shot... It gets me frustrated every time I see benchmarks for Core M. What a crappy value proposition.
Intel needs to either use Imagination's best offerings and work really hard on good drivers (instead of the crappy previous attempts), or make their best offer and buy NVidia already.
Rumor has it that Samsung is currently making a bid to *buy* AMD. Since Samsung has their own fabs and LOTS of cash to spare on R&D where AMD is currently coming short, it would mean huge trouble for Intel in the not so far future. Buying NVidia would totally make sense if they want to stay competitive.
The GPU comparison looks a bit strange, since Core M does quite a bit better at 3DMark than at GfxBench. Both Manhattan and IceStorm run for a couple of minutes, so I don't buy the argument that GfxBench is slower because it runs longer (although that might be true for actual games like Dota). Perhaps it is a driver / application optimization issue. I wonder if GfxBench uses OpenGL or DirectX on Windows. Intel is generally known to have better DX drivers than OGL. Too bad we don't have more cross platform graphics benchmarks.
I've seen other reviews around too, and I don't base my judgements on benchmarks alone. It really seams that the GPU is not up to task. How much could they mess up the driver? This isn't Intel's first attempt at iGPUs...
I hope they keep pushing these thigns out. When we go into the next recession these things will be all over slickdeals for $400 maybe even $300. At around $400 this is a very compelling product.
I was part of the validation process for these Venue Pros and other tablet/2-in-1s for work and we decided not to use these in favor of the Surface Pro 3 mixed in with some Yoga Pros and Transformer T300s (for users who wanted more of a 2-in-1 experience).
There were a number of major problems with the Venue Pro that we ran into compared to the competitors and really only one positive.
Pros: Take care of this easy one first, it has a built-in SC Reader. It works poorly, but it is there. This is an important feature for any Enterprise that does business with the Government or has the highest security standards.
Cons: -1080p 16:9 aspect ratio is terrible for tablet portrait usage. Works OK on a smartphone because that's all we've ever known, but for web content and even most documents, 16:9 just doesn't work and often forces you to scroll LR on a page, especially if there is a menu/banner on either side. -Heavy and thick. Just feels really heavy. Maybe its due to the stocky dimensions, but it just feels heavy in the hand and it is considerably thicker than the SP3. It feels even worst as a tablet than the original Surface Pro and Pro 2. -Dock. Price and overall build quality on the dock is good, but attaching it is not as easy as the SP3 dock and you also can't attach the keyboard while docked like you can with the SP3's dock. Also not as many connectivity options but overall the dock is good especially for the price. -Folio Keyboard. This thing is awful, can't even be compared to the SP3's dock and it is also unnecessarily thick due to the multiple manifolds required for its stand-up folio action. The keyboard itself feels awful, almost no key travel it is more like the touchpads that also double as buttons for your entire keyboard. Also, in "laptop" mode it just doesn't work well because the tablet is SO much heavier than the keyboard and the only support you have is the flexible folio back kickstand. If you want a 2-in-1 spring for the new rigid typepad/battery accessory or look at the Asus Transformer T300 or Yoga Pro 3. -Probably no longer an issue with this Core M variant, but the i5 unit I had the fan would ramp up and it would get LOUD.
So yeah, would definitely check this one out in person before you buy, from my testing and time spent validating multiple of these options, I would spend a bit more and go with a Surface Pro 3 i5 variant with 4GB/128GB or 8GB/256GB or one of the higher-end Surface 3 (non-Pro). Surface Pro line is probably due for an update soon anyways, I would expect to see a Core M variant replacing the low-end i3.
So just to clarify, your experience is with the older model then? Obviously this one is quiet since it is passively cooled. It's great to hear from people who have a lot of experience with these devices.
Yeah it was the older i5 model but I figured Core M would quiet it down which is great to hear. I did also go back and read the parts of the review on the dimensions and it does look like they addressed the thickness and weight concerns somewhat, but I am not sure they've done enough to address the 2-in-1 and screen size/aspect ratio concerns.
In any case I do laud Dell for taking a chance on this segment but like the Surface Pro line, I think more iterations and improvements are needed for this product to do well.
Was that the previous 7130 model? They launched with a shedload of issues after receiving numerous positive reviews. The screen would freeze frequently unless panel self refresh was disabled, the touch screens would register double taps constantly, the stylus was basically useless and the SSDs got laggy over time. After several BIOS updates and firmware updates for almost every component I could imagine having updateable firmware (and not just the touch controller, but the LCD panel itself) it works great. I think Dell really dropped the ball, I assume businesses had already given up on them by that point which is good for me, because refurbs are numerous and cheap :)
Out of curiosity, why aren't MacBook Air battery life times available in the comparison chart? Those are normally held up to be the standard for battery life.
That depends on who you want to believe. CNet did some battery benchmark tests of the XPS 13 and found that it got only 5 hours compared to 8.5 hours on the MacBook Air. Having used a MacBook Air heavily and actually gotten over 8 hours of use from it, I tend to believe CNet. I never feel the need to carry my charger with me, but I have a coworker with an XPS 13 who never seems to be without it. That's also quite telling, IMHO.
I'm using that display right now....and it looks shaper than the 27 inch IPS 2560x1440 display on the iMac directly behind it. TN displays aren't all bad...the ones used in the MacBook Air are good quality. And the pixel density is still higher than just about every desktop monitor that's not 4K or better.
My biggest complaint about the screen is the size...11" is a bit too small. But the 13" MacBook Air felt a bit too big....too much like a traditional notebook. For me, this 11" MacBook Air is like my iPad...I take it with me everywhere.....except that I can do real work on it.
Fine, in your experience it outscores the perceived sharpness of ordinary desktops. But wasn't the QHD+ screen equipped XPS 13 the whole point of the comparison? Heck, even the rMBP 13 (which I absolutely love) makes the MBA kind of a dubious choice. The point is: The Air makes compromises to delivery it's extra battery life - one being below average screen for it's price point.
But the 'only' one in the lineup to not be given the hiDPI 'treatment' ala "Retina". Will the 12" replace it? Or will the Air continue to be an entry level laptop? Time will tell, but one thing's for sure, regardless of the XPS battery life, one still has to deal with Win's awful scaling algorithms (or lack there of). The trade off isn't worth it (especially touch as hiDPI displays targets are tiny and mandate using a stylus, not finger). The TN panels on the Airs while not IPS are of the highest quality and 'look' better than most OEM displays out of the box due to simple calibration pre-sale. The 'only' compromise is your opinion of a 'below average screen' which can be eliminate for a couple hundred bucks and an external display of choice. The iGPU in the Air is excellent and the processor choices, PCIe storage speeds and phenomenal 'support' are beyond any other OEM's abilities right now. In fact, Apple is replacing the logic board on one of our '11 MBAs out of warranty. Gratis. It's JUST the kind of thing that makes OS X and Apple such an excellent choice, not to mention it's still my favorite machine to run Windows on ;)
CNet is not the standard, Anandtech is. Anandtech has the thorough and transparent testing suite and uses native browsers for all platforms. Cnet is like all the other tech bloggers that are in Apple's camp. They test PCs with itunes for video playback and Chrome for browsing while giving macs the benefit of native Safari. They also don't adjust for panel brightness.
I agree, and love reading reviews her, ARS and Display Mate. But there are often discrepancies and one must decide on their own which review to go by. 'Apple's camp'. Seriously? Good. Lord
Um, you know Brett Howse writes for Anandtech and is the author of this article, right? So I'm going to guess that he finds Anandtech's methodology for battery life to be accurate, or at least more accurate than Gizmodo (since benchmarking is always an approximation). And I feel like we go through this all the time, but unless there is calibration of displays and a clear process, battery life tests are MEANINGLESS!
It would be really interesting to see new MacBook in the tables for comparison. I know we can get the data but that is not quite the same as reading the article since you loose the flow and your thought train.
I think core m is a lot better product than people give it credit for. The performance is actually pretty amazing for such a low power device. The problem I see, is that it may be a product for a quite limited market. And the price is too high. I am just not sure with all the competition from cheap atom x86, android, phones, etc. that there is much of a market for such an expensive, relatively low performance device. Possibly in business, where the company wants to impress and is picking up the tab, but personally, I would go with a more powerful ultrabook or even a (gasp) desktop, and some cheap atom tablet or convertible for using on the go.(or even just a smartphone unless you absolutely have to have x86).
It seems that Prices Are getting higher. New surfface 3 with only new Atom is as expensive as this with core-m... So I am not very hopefull for cheaper products. There is not enough competition In x86 at this moment.
Overall performance for the CoreM processor looks great. I'm really hoping that Microsoft has waited long enough so they can go with Skylake in the SP4.
I agree. I'm on the fence between a fanless Core M and a more powerful i5. It would be great to have both options. I suspect that the Core M will be plenty for my usage scenarios, which would include web surfing, movie watching and programming (Visual Studio, WebStorm). But I may decide that some lower end DirectX games would be nice as well.
It would be great to see Core M performance vs low end Core i3 and the new Atom chips. That would really help provide perspective for how these chips perform so people can decide if the portability is really worth it.
Thanks for the review Brett. May I ask if there is a Surface 3 review in the works? If so, please please have a thorough benchmarking section. Other reviews are pretty lacking in that area. Also, I'd love to know if the Surface 3 is using single- or dual-channel RAM.
Ha! Definitely evasive. Full reviews are starting to pop up around the web, so figure a few extra days for the smaller staff and higher quality reviews at AT.
Bought one with keyboard & Pen for my wife for Christmas as a replacement for her 4 y/o laptap and 3 y/o Asus ePad Transformer.
She loves it and it is indeed powerful. I will concur on the keyboard part though. While it types fine, the track pad is borderline terrible. Pretty frustrating to use; though my wife doesn't seem to mind.
yea for that kind of money they can include the keyboard & not just dell but any of these companies that charge a fair amount of money for these toys. I say this because it would be like buying a laptop for $899 but getting told if you want the keyboard it is another $100 just saying..lol looks like nice nice unit mind you but if they can not include what costs them a $15 to $20 keyboard to complete the unit then this is a no go. Kind of like when you buy games & pay $59 to $99 for it but 2 days later they want to sell you more content such as extra characters or more of the game map it makes you feel the company is selling a incomplete product. It would be the same feeling if you went out & bought a $40k to $70k car/truck & they told you if you want to drive it you need to buy tires for it or for an extra $5k you can get the motor to power it. This type of crap is going on it seems in a lot of industries these days & we as buyers are letting it happen..I only used the car thing as an example of what if I know they are not doing this at the moment but they could in the future for all we know...lol
I'm sorry, that thing is hideous... the border is from a crappy tablet from 2-3 years ago. I deployed Yogo Pro 2/3 and Surface Pro 3 (I'll try a Surface 3 once there out) but i know that no one will want that despite its functionality. Sorry Dell :-/
I think I'm glad I have a 7130 (Haswell-Y, active cooling) rather than the Core M 7140. The fan doesn't generally come on unless it's pretty heavily loaded, battery life is great, and even my base i3 model seems to outperform this one under sustained load. I hate the 16:9 aspect ratio and the way the capacitive Windows key wakes it (I think this is an MS requirement though?) - and Windows is still a poor tablet OS, but I do love this device. It runs Android really well, too :)
Replaceable batteries, SSDs and Wireless cards are a boon (in fact, I had to replace the Dell Atheros card that came in mine with an AC-7265 for Android compatibility) and unheard-of in the tablet world,I hope they continued that...
I've got one of the silver active styluses too, I had an A01 black model, which was terrible - almost unusable since it would lose tracking mid-stroke but Dell sent me the silver one FOC and it's been great. Much better battery life, too (who thought AAAA batteries were a good idea?!) It's nice to use in Photoshop, but I'm not much good at drawing so I can't say how it compares to the Wacom digitiser on the Surface Pros...
Regarding the port placement, I wanted to comment that I wish our Surface Pro 3 had its display and USB ports located lower... I rarely hold the tablet while it is plugged in to something; a more common use case is having it sitting on a desk plugged in, where lower ports seem advantageous so that there is less torque on the port from a hanging cable, and it is less cluttered. So I wouldn't take issue with Dell's choice of port placement, personally.
Good to know that I probably would have made a good decision had I decided to go with this instead of the Surface 3. As much as Core M excites me, it really was the price range that pushed me to drop money on a Surface 3 instead of this. Sure, I lost Core M for Atom performance, but had I had that extra $200 in my budget, I would have jumped on the Dell Venue 11 Pro as soon as the 5Y71 version was released. I don't think I'll regret my decision for now, but something with that kind of power in a 4.5W TDP device is really enticing.
I think the battery measurements need to be reported with and without the mobile keyboard. We have no idea what the tablet does on its own in battery life.
The dock with 10/100 is a regression. The WiFi is better than that. The dock does not support 3 monitors with integrated graphics.
I think Microsoft has a better polished solution in the Surface series.
The LTE version has been mentioned from the day this tablet was introduced, but it's not on Dell's website. It is mentioned in the user manual. I've chat'd with Dell Sales support and they are not aware of when it will be released.
I suppose a WiFi hotspot, or a USB based LTE modem would work, but was really looking forward for a Windows tablet with LTE... At the moment, I'm still waiting
(By the way, the documentation on the site on whether there is an LTE modem is remarkably inconsistent)
I'd like to see a review of the HP Elite x2 1011, which has a similar form factor as this and offers similar accessories, except it has fans for active cooling, which I think might mean we can see the true performance potential of these M-5Y71 chips.
Last years model had a removable battery. are you sure this doesn't have one? It has the removable back just like last years, so one would think they would keep the removable battery, especially if this product is aimed at the enterprise market.
Ummmm Win 8.1.......GFXBench.....this is the right manner to do a comparison between ARM and x86 SOCs ???? Why not Core M with Android SO and GFXBench before jump to conclusions?? Yes because GFXBench is cross plataforms for real?? or maybe is born mainly optimized under Android. The results of the benches in this article sometime have not a common sense.
It is all NOT apple to apple. The first rule in a session of benches between Cpus or GPUs is : under the same SO
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
92 Comments
Back to Article
liahos1 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
can you guys start adding normalized battery life for these products against tablets as well?ingwe - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I would really appreciate having that back too. It isn't like I particularly care from a user perspective (obviously overall battery life is more important), but I really like to see how different platforms stack up in this regard.jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
No idea why i even clicked , Core M is a horrible product for the price so got no interest at all in anything with it - hopefully AMD. Nvidia ,Qualcomm and ARM will catch up in single threaded perf at a fraction of the price soon. Well,maybe not ARM since A72 seems to be actually smaller than A57 , die size wise.Anyway this actually made me laugh when i realized that it kinda looks like the Moto Xoom except with thicker bezels (first Android tab ,4 years ago). OEMs should put more effort than this even in 100$ tabs.
Speedfriend - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Apple managed a giant 10% improvement in single core performance between A7 and A8...So with the top Core M single core performance around 60% higher than the A8X, Apple will need to produce a miracle.
And as for the cost, a 128gb iPad Air 2 is $699+$100 for a decent keyboard case versus the low end core M equipped Asus T300 Chi which comes with a keyboard for $699. And the high end T300Chi, which will obliterate the iPAd Air 2 comes in at $899 with 8GB of memory
jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Apple has no relevance, they have many limitations and high prices so no reason to even consider them.MrSpadge - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Apple has a lot of relevance here, because they've got the ARM core with the highest single threaded performance. If anyone closes the gap to Intel it's going to be them. Even if Qualcom could do it, they need to put 4 cores into phones for the "bigger is better" crowd, which means any single core must not be too big - otherwise people will complain that it gets too hot.And if Apple only got 10% on their last refresh they may be approaching the region of diminishing returns that Intel and AMD have long been in. It's easy to improve & grow when you start from nothing, but an entirely different matter once you look at mature technology.
jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Apple is not a reasonable purchase so it doesn't matter, even if they have 2 times the perf it's not relevant in the real world.It is true that the Android guys do need more cores in general but it's also true that Intel doesn't design it's cores for this kind of TDP. And do remember to compare sustained perf and burst perf.
I don't know for sure the core size for Broadwell on Intel's 14nm or A57 on 14nm Samsung but likely 7mm2+ vs bellow 2mm2 so A57 must be some 4 times smaller. For Apple 2 cores plus cache are some 12.5mm2 on 20nm TSMC but the cache is not very die efficient and on 14nm Samsung the 12.5mm2 would be closer to 10.5mm.
For A72 ARM claimed 2.4GHz sustained clocks on 16nmFF+ in phones and it appears they mean quad cores. It also appears that A72 is smaller than A57. The numbers i've seen were core size 3.3mm2 , quad cluster(so with cache) 18.7mm2 but not certain about process, i believe it's on 28nm but that could be wrong. A72 at 2.4GHz should be pretty good and it remains to be seen what's the burst perf and how it clocks at higher TDP. It's not impossible for it to be close enough in tabs. We should see the dual A72 @ 2.4GHz on 28nm from Mediatek soon in tabs (some early benchmarks are in the wild already) and later this year the Qualcomm midrange phone SoCs with A72 at 1.9GHz and that will give us a better idea about what kind of clocks would be needed on 16FF+ and 14nm.
Qualcomm's custom core must beat A72 or there is no point in using it and that's the case with all the other custom cores from AMD, Nvidia, Samsung and whatever else comes.
pSupaNova - Tuesday, April 21, 2015 - link
No Nvidia has the ARM core with the highest single threaded performance.Look at the Benchmarks in this site for the N9 tablet.
sonicmerlin - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
They had a 30-40% performance improvement in CPU.Speedfriend - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
A8 at 1.4ghz single core geekbench 1619A7 at 1.4ghz single core geekbench 1468
Improvement = 10%
thunng8 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
A8X in the iPad Air 2 does ~1820 in single threaded geekbenchTrackSmart - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
This seems like an overly strong statement ("horrible!" -- for the price).Core M is a low-power platform. For standard office productivity tasks, it provides similar performance to 15 watt ultrabook processors, but only uses 4.5 watts of power. That's pretty impressive. I don't see where the "horrible" part comes into play. These are meant to be ultramobile parts. The laws of physics dictate that there will be some tradeoff between power consumption and performance when you are constrained by thermal limits and battery capacity.
-If you don't like Core M, choose a product built around a higher TDP platform and move to the other side of the curve (higher power consumption, but also consistently higher performance in continuous workloads).
-If you want a snappy system for standard office productivity tasks in the most mobile form-factor possible, choose a Core M product, and enjoy similar performance to 15 watt parts for "burst" oriented workloads, but in a thinner, lighter, longer-lasting form factor.
-If you want a cheaper price point, choose a slower product built around an Atom processor, which will offer a similar form factor but lower performance.
-And if you can live without Windows, sure, buy an ARM-based tablet.
** It's fantastic that we have these choices today. ** If your problem is the price of Core M, well, unfortunately we are talking about full-on Core architecture processors. Without greater competition, Intel isn't going to give these processors away at Atom prices. And especially not at ARM prices.
As for this particular product, I agree it does't look very "premium" to me, either, that has nothing to do with the Core M processor inside. I'm personally impressed with what Asus did with the UX305 for $699 and a Core M processor. Solid ultra-portable performance in a very thin chassis with long battery life.
Didn't mean to jump on you here. Just sort of surprised that anyone would call Core M itself horrible. Many people have been waiting for this kind of performance in such a low TDP x86 processor.
Qwertilot - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Apple have the resources that they presumably could (more or less) match the CPU single core of this, but I don't think putting so much single core performance into a tablet chip is what you'd chose to do if designing specifically for tablets.Especially with Apple being very keen on having lots and lots of graphics firepower to hand.
CoreM's design makes much more sense if you're going for fanless notebooks, at times with the cooling systems around to run it at somewhat higher power than you'd want for a tablet etc.
Marc GP - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Sorry, but no. Core M doesn't gives you the performance of a 15w ultrabook using only 4.5watts.Because it can only give you that for short bursts before seriously throttling and having to lower its clock from 2,8Ghz (turbo) to its nominal 1Ghz frequency, the only one they can keep for large periods.
Don't try anything that needs steady performance on a Core M, like gaming, for example.
TrackSmart - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I don't mean to be rude, but I don't think you read my post or the article itself very carefully. My post says that for typical office productivity tasks, which are burst-oriented, you get similar performance. I also say that if you want sustained higher performance, you need to move to a higher TDP. The article says similar things and shows benchmarks to demonstrate this. So what exactly are you arguing that I didn't say myself?My Post:
"For standard office productivity tasks, it provides similar performance to 15 watt ultrabook processors, but only uses 4.5 watts of power. ...choose a Core M product, and enjoy similar performance to 15 watt parts for "burst" oriented workloads, but in a thinner, lighter, longer-lasting form factor."
Article: In the PCMark 8 section, which simulates office productivity tasks -- "In these types of workloads, Core M can outperform [15 watt TDP] Haswell-U series parts from the Ultrabooks of last year, which is fairly impressive in a passively cooled device."
To "jjj", you still haven't provided a sensible argument. I'd love it if Intel sold these chips for $50, but it isn't going to happen. You'd have to be living on another planet to think otherwise. Until someone else offers similar x86 CPU performance in a comparable power envelope, these products are going to command prices that are similar to Intel's other Core series processors.
jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
It's the worst chip in history!! lolLet me explain why and remember i said horrible for the price.
Die is about 80mm2 so similar to the Exynos 7420 and 50% smaller than a Snapdragon801. Sure it comes on a module so that adds to costs a bit but Intel launched it at some 280$. Even if an OEM would pay 3 times less ,the chip would still cost way way too much. Mobile chips that size sell for 15-30$ depending on how new they are (start at 30 and keep dropping during their lifetime), IHS just a couple of days ago estimated that the Exynos 7420 costs 29.5$ ( to buy not to make).
So Intel here is just abusing it's x86 monopoly and charging absurd prices for the chip. That's why we don't see tabs like this one at 300$ and why the chip is horrible. If it was below 50$ it would be fine but it's a hell of a lot more.
PS: you can check die size and price in one of the early articles on Core M here on AT.
jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Correction- Meant to say that SD801 is 50% bigger or Core M is 33% smaller than SD801 and ended up with something else.smilingcrow - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Translation. It's a great chip but I can't afford it and I'm so very very angry.jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Not even a trace of anger ,i know Intel's ways too well for it's behavior to impress me and i can afford it but i'm not that stupid to buy it (not that i need it to begin with).Anyway , thanks for your valuable contribution to the conversation , it was a true delight.
akdj - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
Excellent words 'crow. I'm thinking jjj doesn't understand X86, ARM, and bigLittle architecture NOR how a mobile processor is 'of benefit' to MOST people in today's world. They're as fast as the core i5 power in SB, close to IB and even with thermal limitations, it smokes the Intel iGPU 4000. I'm ambidextrous, using OS X and Windows Android and iOS. To exclaim 'the worst chip in history' considering where Intel was just 18 months ago VERY WELL be the MOST ignorant statement I've seen on Anand's site in some time. Regardless of price (remember, R&D must be recouped to bring the archtiecture's price down), and the magic Apple's done with 64 bit processing over the past two years, it's Qualcomm that's been blindsided. Samsung has switched to their chips, has the A9 contract and have settled disputes everywhere but America. The power of samsung and Apple's engineering prowess and chip trickery (A8x and A8, second and 2.5 gen 64bit chips are nearing a year old, as they start production early summer on the fall iOS releases), it's Intel and Apple/Samsung and TSMC. What the A8/A8x did for the iPad Air 2 is. Itching short of incredible and as an owner for almost nine months, I'm confident there are very few folks in this world that need 'more power' than iPad Air2, Nexus 9, or this Dell reviewed. Most of us that 'work' with a company supplied computer don't really feel like desktops when we get home. Don't have time with the kids and it's easy to throw in the truck and forget about the charger! Laptops are a PITA in comparison and not 'really' that much more capable ESPECIALLY if you use the tools built for and sold I the App Store. Every app of the million plus are optimized at this time for the A5/6 families of SoCs. That's the missing point here. With this Dell, the entire world of software 'Windows built' is now available to you with significantly faster storage and a mature 64bit process from a company that's led the way in silicon for thirty years. And they, like Apple, have the paper to test, retest and 'make it work'. Tegra. Tegra 3, 4 and now these ULV procs taking it to an entirely different level of performanceWith the iGPU it's a matter of efficient cooling in fabless designs to slow down the throttling. That's going to come as they continue the more efficient designs with Skylake and the future.
Just plain ignorance. So sad with all these power packed choices we've got now, their time is limited. Not enough room for a half dozen silicon manufacturers. 2, maybe three will win out and my bets on ARM, Intel and possibly Sammys Exnyos
MrSpadge - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Well Said! I'm not going to buy Core M because I value performance over mobility - yet this doesn't make it a bad product. If you want maximum performance at high mobility, nothing comes close to Core M.dj_aris - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Core M is in fact a new cpu category on it's own, a cpu that resembles the single core performance of "core" cpus while in the Atoms' TDP envelope (at least before it throttles!). But, as with every new product, it's overpriced at launch. Wait for the Skylake release, I say.lilmoe - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
That's the main point. It's REALLY overpriced.xthetenth - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Pay a pretty high price for the absolute best burst performance for a snappy device. I've heard much worse than that.smilingcrow - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
The M-5Y71 is the same price as the i5-4300U in my laptop with the same base & turbo boost clocks for the CPU. Given the same cooling as my laptop has it should perform very similarly for CPU loads. Not fussed about GPU loads so haven't focussed on that but seemingly it will struggle to match the U series when both are stressed.Marc GP - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
A category where they can only keep this performance for short bursts before having to low their frequency from 2,8Ghz (turbo) to their nominal 1Ghz (where you don't get any much performance than on a simple Atom).ppi - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Even in the benchmarks, where sustained performance is necessary, Core-M is some 25% slower compared to 15W Broadwell. ONLY.This effectively means, that if task is pain on Core-M, it will be pain on 15W Broadwell as well. I.e. if some task is not snappy and requires waiting on Core-M, it requires waiting on Broadwell as well. And only desktop class chips may have the oomph to be significantly faster.
I do not count in games, but nobody considers Broadwell-U gaming SoC either.
smilingcrow - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
If you had read the recent detailed Anandtech overview of Core M you would see that is a fallacy. I was surprised how well Core M does in a fanless laptop versus one with a Broadwell i5 that is fan cooled. And even more how well it does in a tablet where surface temperate is more of an issue so throttling is more prevalent.A Core M-5Y71 in my Latitude E7440 with a slightly beefier cooler would I imagine come close to my i5-4300U even for extended loads. This is purely for CPU loads as the GPU is another issue that doesn’t concern me.
MrSpadge - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
When it throttles it's actually entering Atoms TDP envelope. Before that it's allowed to use more power for short periods. That's the whole point of a Thermal Design Power.zepi - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
If you don't care about absolute performance, Intel is happy to sell you a Baytrail for quite a bit cheaper.If you do... Well, no one else can match Core M's CPU-performance even remotely.
xthetenth - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
If by soon you mean years from now sure. Right now the speed comparison has a huge gulf between Core M and everything else in that power range. I really don't get how people manage to keep making predictions this bad. It's probably because they decide before reading about what they're talking about.jjj - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
The Denver core is odd but it's not that far behind is some situations even on 28nm.If they tune it further and goes 14nm things would get a lot better.AMD we have no clue where it lands, Qualcomm's new core got to be faster than A72 and A72 is pretty fast.
Apple even with just a shrink to 14mm wouldn't be that far behind.
So when i said soon i meant soon.
After all Core M has big cores clocked way low, shouldn't be that hard to beat it since the core is likely outside it's optimal range.Someone that would design the core for such a TDP would have a big advantage.
MrSpadge - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
If you're fine with the performance and software collection those cheap ARM SoC's can offer you - fine, but then compare to Silvermont rather than Core M. Having ultra mobily performance and x86 is worth a lot to some people. Let the market decide if it's enough to warrant such a product.nerd1 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Still has IMMENSELY better value than apple's core M product.akdj - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
...? Apple's MacBook? With a phenomenal display, the fastest storage available, 256GB PCIe storage solutions and less than a Kg? Is there a hiDPI computer running Win 8(,1/10) you can point to that is achieving what Apple has with its MacBook (again, brand new, the R&D costs recovered and you've got quick price breaks with a phenomenal operating system that works seamlessly to aggregate and integrate with your mobile devices, and continuity with Handoff ...and you can run Windows!). The trackpad, the new keyboard. ARS isn't known to be an Apple fans paradise but it's a great review, phenomenal display, ultra light (he compares with a 11" MBA), fast as hell and incredible battery life. Nice to leave the Chargers and wires at home. It's a 'second' laptop solution to most and to those as a primary ownership computer, I'm sure they're not rendering Pro-Res from an HDV codec and transcoding video for 'speed'. They're checking Facebook, Twitter, email and surfing. Word processing and media enjoyment. For these tasks alone, it's prefect (& able to run 4k @ 30hZ. Not bad) as their solo computer. Makes me laugh as my wife was using the MacBook core 2 duo 2007 @ 2.16GHz/2GB/120GB spinner until two years ago. Bought the MBA for her in 2011 and it's still kicking ass and it's what SHE needs (she's a twenty two year pilot in Alaska me uses iPads and the MBA for flight planning and navigation, a test system (NextGen) with the FAA using three dimensional terrain, weather and traffic information, flight planning and diversion, real time weather and traffic, NFZs or other advisories.The LAST thing she wants at home is a four pound laptop or two pond tablet at home for enjoyment when she's not at work ...me, I run the business side and we concentrate on audio and visual production across the state of Alaska. Until a year ago I was dumping P2 cards off to a 15" PowerBook because of the perfect PCMICA slot, with FCP7, field edits and hacks were easily tackled. Now with less pricey proprietary transfer and encoding we've switched to rMBPs solely in the field and a pair of MacPros at the studio. I need the power to finalize but she's doing all the heavy lifting and safety with MUCH less power but significantly better battery life than the tools I use. I've every intention of buying one when they hit for her. It's a helluva laptop
khanikun - Wednesday, April 22, 2015 - link
Fastest storage available? You do know that most companies just put some random SSD into their tablets, laptops, etc. Usually some cheap value brand to save on costs. Hardly the fastest available storage. If it was, aftermarket SSD companies wouldn't be making bookoo dollars.As for comparison, really. Have you not even seen a Surface Pro 3? The thing spanks the Macbook in performance, all while being a year older. Now there are pros and cons for both, where a user's usage will dictate which is the better purchase for their needs.
The Surface Pro 3 is both thicker and thinner than the Macbook. It's also lighter and heavier than the Macbook. Depends on whether you add in the keyboard.
SP3 is MB share the same battery life, but expect the MB to loose if you bootcamp, cause you know the thing's battery life goes a bit down the drain when it tries to run Windows.
PPI screens are comparable, with the MB a little better. At the same time, the SP3 is a touchscreen and has an awesome stylus.
Performance, SP3 wins that easily, but it also costs more, if you configure it to have the same storage option as the MB.
MB has a port. SP3 has multiple ports for expanding. Including the microSD slot to add more storage.
MB has the better keyboard. Not much contest with the SP3's type cover.
If you're looking for more downright power in a very portable package, the SP3 is the better bet over the MB.
nathanddrews - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Great looking tablet.Sorry if I missed it, but what sort of external display support exists (in general, but specifically when using the dock)? 4K at 30Hz or 60Hz?
Seeing as how I just bought a USB 3.0 to GbE adapter for $10 for my tablet last month, the 10/100 does seem like a shortcoming.
rfunaki - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
I have a couple of the previous models of this tablet, and use them with the dock and external monitors. I can't spear for 4k, but one of them is outputting to a 2560x1440p monitor, but when using the dock, this limits the overall max output on a 2nd external monitor. To be able to output anything higher than 1080p while also outputting 1440p, I have to connect the 2nd external display to the tablet itself (not the dock). So just an assumption based on this, I would imagine if you output to a 4k external monitor, you may not have the flexibility to also output to a 2nd external monitor, if that's something you were interested in.Also, good review, but just a note that they released a new backwards-compatible dock for this new model that has gigabit Ethernet. I wonder if the new dock also resolves the display output limitations.
rfunaki - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
I have a couple of the previous models of this tablet, and use them with the dock and external monitors. I can't spear for 4k, but one of them is outputting to a 2560x1440p monitor, but when using the dock, this limits the overall max output on a 2nd external monitor. To be able to output anything higher than 1080p while also outputting 1440p, I have to connect the 2nd external display to the tablet itself (not the dock). So just an assumption based on this, I would imagine if you output to a 4k external monitor, you may not have the flexibility to also output to a 2nd external monitor, if that's something you were interested in.Also, good review, but just a note that they released a new backwards-compatible dock for this new model that has gigabit Ethernet. I wonder if the new dock also resolves the display output limitations.
lilmoe - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
My God, after all these years, and at that price you'd think that Intel would get the GPU right, especially when you look at the comparative size in the die shot... It gets me frustrated every time I see benchmarks for Core M. What a crappy value proposition.Intel needs to either use Imagination's best offerings and work really hard on good drivers (instead of the crappy previous attempts), or make their best offer and buy NVidia already.
Rumor has it that Samsung is currently making a bid to *buy* AMD. Since Samsung has their own fabs and LOTS of cash to spare on R&D where AMD is currently coming short, it would mean huge trouble for Intel in the not so far future. Buying NVidia would totally make sense if they want to stay competitive.
duriel - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
The GPU comparison looks a bit strange, since Core M does quite a bit better at 3DMark than at GfxBench. Both Manhattan and IceStorm run for a couple of minutes, so I don't buy the argument that GfxBench is slower because it runs longer (although that might be true for actual games like Dota). Perhaps it is a driver / application optimization issue. I wonder if GfxBench uses OpenGL or DirectX on Windows. Intel is generally known to have better DX drivers than OGL. Too bad we don't have more cross platform graphics benchmarks.lilmoe - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I've seen other reviews around too, and I don't base my judgements on benchmarks alone. It really seams that the GPU is not up to task. How much could they mess up the driver? This isn't Intel's first attempt at iGPUs...thunng8 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Ice Storm is a fair bit shorter than gfxBench benchmarks and IMO gfxBench graphically looks much better especially ManhattanShadowmaster625 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I hope they keep pushing these thigns out. When we go into the next recession these things will be all over slickdeals for $400 maybe even $300. At around $400 this is a very compelling product.chizow - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I was part of the validation process for these Venue Pros and other tablet/2-in-1s for work and we decided not to use these in favor of the Surface Pro 3 mixed in with some Yoga Pros and Transformer T300s (for users who wanted more of a 2-in-1 experience).There were a number of major problems with the Venue Pro that we ran into compared to the competitors and really only one positive.
Pros: Take care of this easy one first, it has a built-in SC Reader. It works poorly, but it is there. This is an important feature for any Enterprise that does business with the Government or has the highest security standards.
Cons:
-1080p 16:9 aspect ratio is terrible for tablet portrait usage. Works OK on a smartphone because that's all we've ever known, but for web content and even most documents, 16:9 just doesn't work and often forces you to scroll LR on a page, especially if there is a menu/banner on either side.
-Heavy and thick. Just feels really heavy. Maybe its due to the stocky dimensions, but it just feels heavy in the hand and it is considerably thicker than the SP3. It feels even worst as a tablet than the original Surface Pro and Pro 2.
-Dock. Price and overall build quality on the dock is good, but attaching it is not as easy as the SP3 dock and you also can't attach the keyboard while docked like you can with the SP3's dock. Also not as many connectivity options but overall the dock is good especially for the price.
-Folio Keyboard. This thing is awful, can't even be compared to the SP3's dock and it is also unnecessarily thick due to the multiple manifolds required for its stand-up folio action. The keyboard itself feels awful, almost no key travel it is more like the touchpads that also double as buttons for your entire keyboard. Also, in "laptop" mode it just doesn't work well because the tablet is SO much heavier than the keyboard and the only support you have is the flexible folio back kickstand. If you want a 2-in-1 spring for the new rigid typepad/battery accessory or look at the Asus Transformer T300 or Yoga Pro 3.
-Probably no longer an issue with this Core M variant, but the i5 unit I had the fan would ramp up and it would get LOUD.
So yeah, would definitely check this one out in person before you buy, from my testing and time spent validating multiple of these options, I would spend a bit more and go with a Surface Pro 3 i5 variant with 4GB/128GB or 8GB/256GB or one of the higher-end Surface 3 (non-Pro). Surface Pro line is probably due for an update soon anyways, I would expect to see a Core M variant replacing the low-end i3.
Brett Howse - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
So just to clarify, your experience is with the older model then? Obviously this one is quiet since it is passively cooled. It's great to hear from people who have a lot of experience with these devices.chizow - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Yeah it was the older i5 model but I figured Core M would quiet it down which is great to hear. I did also go back and read the parts of the review on the dimensions and it does look like they addressed the thickness and weight concerns somewhat, but I am not sure they've done enough to address the 2-in-1 and screen size/aspect ratio concerns.In any case I do laud Dell for taking a chance on this segment but like the Surface Pro line, I think more iterations and improvements are needed for this product to do well.
DigitalFreak - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
We bought a bunch of these @ work. Absolute junk. Do yourself a favor and look at the Lenovo Helix.lilmoe - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Mind sharing your experience? Was it performance or overall quality?Azurael - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Was that the previous 7130 model? They launched with a shedload of issues after receiving numerous positive reviews. The screen would freeze frequently unless panel self refresh was disabled, the touch screens would register double taps constantly, the stylus was basically useless and the SSDs got laggy over time. After several BIOS updates and firmware updates for almost every component I could imagine having updateable firmware (and not just the touch controller, but the LCD panel itself) it works great. I think Dell really dropped the ball, I assume businesses had already given up on them by that point which is good for me, because refurbs are numerous and cheap :)gijames1225 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Out of curiosity, why aren't MacBook Air battery life times available in the comparison chart? Those are normally held up to be the standard for battery life.Brett Howse - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
They are no longer the standard, Dell has passed the Air with the XPS 13. But you can see everything in Bench http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Notebook/620TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
That depends on who you want to believe. CNet did some battery benchmark tests of the XPS 13 and found that it got only 5 hours compared to 8.5 hours on the MacBook Air. Having used a MacBook Air heavily and actually gotten over 8 hours of use from it, I tend to believe CNet. I never feel the need to carry my charger with me, but I have a coworker with an XPS 13 who never seems to be without it. That's also quite telling, IMHO.TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Correction... The Battery Numbers for the XPS came from Gizmodo....not CNet.YuLeven - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Remember that the MacBook Air has a crappy low resolution TN display that accounts for a reduced energy usage.TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I'm using that display right now....and it looks shaper than the 27 inch IPS 2560x1440 display on the iMac directly behind it. TN displays aren't all bad...the ones used in the MacBook Air are good quality. And the pixel density is still higher than just about every desktop monitor that's not 4K or better.My biggest complaint about the screen is the size...11" is a bit too small. But the 13" MacBook Air felt a bit too big....too much like a traditional notebook. For me, this 11" MacBook Air is like my iPad...I take it with me everywhere.....except that I can do real work on it.
YuLeven - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Fine, in your experience it outscores the perceived sharpness of ordinary desktops. But wasn't the QHD+ screen equipped XPS 13 the whole point of the comparison? Heck, even the rMBP 13 (which I absolutely love) makes the MBA kind of a dubious choice. The point is: The Air makes compromises to delivery it's extra battery life - one being below average screen for it's price point.akdj - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
But the 'only' one in the lineup to not be given the hiDPI 'treatment' ala "Retina". Will the 12" replace it? Or will the Air continue to be an entry level laptop? Time will tell, but one thing's for sure, regardless of the XPS battery life, one still has to deal with Win's awful scaling algorithms (or lack there of). The trade off isn't worth it (especially touch as hiDPI displays targets are tiny and mandate using a stylus, not finger). The TN panels on the Airs while not IPS are of the highest quality and 'look' better than most OEM displays out of the box due to simple calibration pre-sale. The 'only' compromise is your opinion of a 'below average screen' which can be eliminate for a couple hundred bucks and an external display of choice. The iGPU in the Air is excellent and the processor choices, PCIe storage speeds and phenomenal 'support' are beyond any other OEM's abilities right now. In fact, Apple is replacing the logic board on one of our '11 MBAs out of warranty. Gratis. It's JUST the kind of thing that makes OS X and Apple such an excellent choice, not to mention it's still my favorite machine to run Windows on ;)id4andrei - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
CNet is not the standard, Anandtech is. Anandtech has the thorough and transparent testing suite and uses native browsers for all platforms. Cnet is like all the other tech bloggers that are in Apple's camp. They test PCs with itunes for video playback and Chrome for browsing while giving macs the benefit of native Safari. They also don't adjust for panel brightness.akdj - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link
I agree, and love reading reviews her, ARS and Display Mate. But there are often discrepancies and one must decide on their own which review to go by. 'Apple's camp'. Seriously? Good. Lordevonitzer - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Um, you know Brett Howse writes for Anandtech and is the author of this article, right? So I'm going to guess that he finds Anandtech's methodology for battery life to be accurate, or at least more accurate than Gizmodo (since benchmarking is always an approximation). And I feel like we go through this all the time, but unless there is calibration of displays and a clear process, battery life tests are MEANINGLESS!hlovatt - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
It would be really interesting to see new MacBook in the tables for comparison. I know we can get the data but that is not quite the same as reading the article since you loose the flow and your thought train.frozentundra123456 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I think core m is a lot better product than people give it credit for. The performance is actually pretty amazing for such a low power device. The problem I see, is that it may be a product for a quite limited market. And the price is too high. I am just not sure with all the competition from cheap atom x86, android, phones, etc. that there is much of a market for such an expensive, relatively low performance device. Possibly in business, where the company wants to impress and is picking up the tab, but personally, I would go with a more powerful ultrabook or even a (gasp) desktop, and some cheap atom tablet or convertible for using on the go.(or even just a smartphone unless you absolutely have to have x86).ingwe - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Agreed. I think that enterprise will be the largest user of these until (if?) the price comes down.If the price does come down, it would probably obliterate a lot of the low-end market though.
haukionkannel - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
It seems that Prices Are getting higher. New surfface 3 with only new Atom is as expensive as this with core-m... So I am not very hopefull for cheaper products.There is not enough competition In x86 at this moment.
xthetenth - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Even non-pro surface is a very premium product apart from the CPU.sorten - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Overall performance for the CoreM processor looks great. I'm really hoping that Microsoft has waited long enough so they can go with Skylake in the SP4.xthetenth - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
That would be great to see, and I'm hoping the SP4 has a range from Core M to i7.sorten - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I agree. I'm on the fence between a fanless Core M and a more powerful i5. It would be great to have both options. I suspect that the Core M will be plenty for my usage scenarios, which would include web surfing, movie watching and programming (Visual Studio, WebStorm). But I may decide that some lower end DirectX games would be nice as well.xilience - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
It would be great to see Core M performance vs low end Core i3 and the new Atom chips. That would really help provide perspective for how these chips perform so people can decide if the portability is really worth it.ScottSoapbox - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Displaying battery life to the ten thousandths place is a bit ridiculous.smilingcrow - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
It's 100.000% ridiculous.kyuu - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Thanks for the review Brett. May I ask if there is a Surface 3 review in the works? If so, please please have a thorough benchmarking section. Other reviews are pretty lacking in that area. Also, I'd love to know if the Surface 3 is using single- or dual-channel RAM.Brett Howse - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Definitely something we want to do.kyuu - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
A bit cryptic, but thanks for the answer nonetheless.sorten - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Ha! Definitely evasive. Full reviews are starting to pop up around the web, so figure a few extra days for the smaller staff and higher quality reviews at AT.Drumsticks - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Thanks for the review! Can we get a GPU comparison between Core M and older gen Ivy and Sandy based CPUs?Brett Howse - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
We keep all of our data in Bench, which is linked at the top of the site. http://anandtech.com/bench/Notebook/308LancerVI - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Bought one with keyboard & Pen for my wife for Christmas as a replacement for her 4 y/o laptap and 3 y/o Asus ePad Transformer.She loves it and it is indeed powerful. I will concur on the keyboard part though. While it types fine, the track pad is borderline terrible. Pretty frustrating to use; though my wife doesn't seem to mind.
Overall, a powerful pad with a lot of options.
rocky12345 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
yea for that kind of money they can include the keyboard & not just dell but any of these companies that charge a fair amount of money for these toys. I say this because it would be like buying a laptop for $899 but getting told if you want the keyboard it is another $100 just saying..lol looks like nice nice unit mind you but if they can not include what costs them a $15 to $20 keyboard to complete the unit then this is a no go. Kind of like when you buy games & pay $59 to $99 for it but 2 days later they want to sell you more content such as extra characters or more of the game map it makes you feel the company is selling a incomplete product. It would be the same feeling if you went out & bought a $40k to $70k car/truck & they told you if you want to drive it you need to buy tires for it or for an extra $5k you can get the motor to power it. This type of crap is going on it seems in a lot of industries these days & we as buyers are letting it happen..I only used the car thing as an example of what if I know they are not doing this at the moment but they could in the future for all we know...lolNeatOman - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I'm sorry, that thing is hideous... the border is from a crappy tablet from 2-3 years ago. I deployed Yogo Pro 2/3 and Surface Pro 3 (I'll try a Surface 3 once there out) but i know that no one will want that despite its functionality. Sorry Dell :-/Azurael - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I think I'm glad I have a 7130 (Haswell-Y, active cooling) rather than the Core M 7140. The fan doesn't generally come on unless it's pretty heavily loaded, battery life is great, and even my base i3 model seems to outperform this one under sustained load. I hate the 16:9 aspect ratio and the way the capacitive Windows key wakes it (I think this is an MS requirement though?) - and Windows is still a poor tablet OS, but I do love this device. It runs Android really well, too :)Replaceable batteries, SSDs and Wireless cards are a boon (in fact, I had to replace the Dell Atheros card that came in mine with an AC-7265 for Android compatibility) and unheard-of in the tablet world,I hope they continued that...
I've got one of the silver active styluses too, I had an A01 black model, which was terrible - almost unusable since it would lose tracking mid-stroke but Dell sent me the silver one FOC and it's been great. Much better battery life, too (who thought AAAA batteries were a good idea?!) It's nice to use in Photoshop, but I'm not much good at drawing so I can't say how it compares to the Wacom digitiser on the Surface Pros...
awall13 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Regarding the port placement, I wanted to comment that I wish our Surface Pro 3 had its display and USB ports located lower... I rarely hold the tablet while it is plugged in to something; a more common use case is having it sitting on a desk plugged in, where lower ports seem advantageous so that there is less torque on the port from a hanging cable, and it is less cluttered. So I wouldn't take issue with Dell's choice of port placement, personally.metayoshi - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Good to know that I probably would have made a good decision had I decided to go with this instead of the Surface 3. As much as Core M excites me, it really was the price range that pushed me to drop money on a Surface 3 instead of this. Sure, I lost Core M for Atom performance, but had I had that extra $200 in my budget, I would have jumped on the Dell Venue 11 Pro as soon as the 5Y71 version was released. I don't think I'll regret my decision for now, but something with that kind of power in a 4.5W TDP device is really enticing.eanazag - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I think the battery measurements need to be reported with and without the mobile keyboard. We have no idea what the tablet does on its own in battery life.The dock with 10/100 is a regression. The WiFi is better than that. The dock does not support 3 monitors with integrated graphics.
I think Microsoft has a better polished solution in the Surface series.
Hulk - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Don't know about this tablet but Imperial Walkers are very cool.And what are the little guys called again? Also very cool.
J_Hyde - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
The LTE version has been mentioned from the day this tablet was introduced, but it's not on Dell's website. It is mentioned in the user manual. I've chat'd with Dell Sales support and they are not aware of when it will be released.I suppose a WiFi hotspot, or a USB based LTE modem would work, but was really looking forward for a Windows tablet with LTE... At the moment, I'm still waiting
(By the way, the documentation on the site on whether there is an LTE modem is remarkably inconsistent)
lewisl9029 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
I'd like to see a review of the HP Elite x2 1011, which has a similar form factor as this and offers similar accessories, except it has fans for active cooling, which I think might mean we can see the true performance potential of these M-5Y71 chips.Morawka - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
Last years model had a removable battery. are you sure this doesn't have one? It has the removable back just like last years, so one would think they would keep the removable battery, especially if this product is aimed at the enterprise market.JumpingJack - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
"At 10.8 inches in screen diameter"Diameter is a term which describes an attribute associated to a circle. You mean "At 10.8 inches measured at the diagonal for the screen"
Gondalf - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
Ummmm Win 8.1.......GFXBench.....this is the right manner to do a comparison between ARM and x86 SOCs ???? Why not Core M with Android SO and GFXBench before jump to conclusions??Yes because GFXBench is cross plataforms for real?? or maybe is born mainly optimized under Android. The results of the benches in this article sometime have not a common sense.
It is all NOT apple to apple. The first rule in a session of benches between Cpus or GPUs is : under the same SO
Malphius - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link
OH MAH GAWD THE KEYBOARD ISN'T INCLUDED ): ): ): It's just TOOOOO expensive. Where's that $1300 netbook Apple just made? GIMMEEEEE