Sometimes, that means doing the complete opposite of the conventional approach. And today, we believe it’s time for some unconventional thinking.

The truth is that little has changed in the way x86 processors are marketed since AMD introduced 64 bits and multi-core processors. Even then the marketing, while it was new and creative, was another way of saying, “faster, better and more.”  It didn’t fundamentally change the way the industry talked about its products.

And today, in the mobile or notebook world the key issue for consumer is not the processor (or even the speed of the processor), but rather the combination of parts – or the “platform” as we call it – that make up the machine. There are of course customers who still want the processor which has the fastest “0-60 mph” speed, but we believe most mainstream consumers are more interested in how they are going to use the system, not necessarily how fast it is.

One of the reasons for this disconnect is that the “0-60 mph” speed metrics are derived through benchmarks like SysMark07. I have used this blog to talk about how a benchmark like MM07 on its own does not reflect typical battery usage (i.e. they don’t tell the “whole story”), and SysMark07 has the same limitation with workloads.  I will leave it to other people to detail why this benchmark is inadequate for most users, but I will point out that the software the benchmark uses has virtually nothing to do with videos, music or helping your manage your photos. Also, it doesn’t run Windows 7.

The Consumer PC Buying Experience Today

For the typical consumer considering a notebook purchase, the first question is typically a usage question, maybe followed by a size and weight consideration. In testing we did, not once did the shopper ask for a processor brand as primary consideration. What mainstream consumers want is machines on which to do office work, to watch movies, to listen to music, to edit their photos and even edit their videos.

While processor speed has an effect on how quickly some of these types of workloads can be done, other parts of the platform – elements like the graphics cards, the size of the screen and the reality of how long the battery will really last – can be just as important.

If we are going to help the consumer get the right machine for them, we really need to market to them in a way that makes sense. We started that a few months ago by beginning an industry conversation around battery life. Today we want to take that to the next level.

A New VISION

Today we introduce a whole new way to help consumers buy the right machine for their needs. Today AMD is introducing a new approach in retail we call VISION Technology from AMD.

Other  blogs will give you all the details about what this represents in terms of the brand and the technology – the platform. In particular, check out Pat Moorhead’s blog on our new ultrathin mainstream notebook platform  or Ian McNaughton’s blog on how Microsoft Windows 7 and DirectX 11 are also going to enhance users’ computing experiences. And for a simple guide you can check this website www.amd.com/whichvision.

In its simplest form we are connecting the needs of the consumer to the PC – not the processor. When you go into a retail store this holiday you will see VISION Basic, VISION Premium and VISION Ultimate on many PCs powered by AMD technology – not the name of our processor. Straightforward guides for retailers and consumers will help them know which VISION is right for them.

• VISION – Basic is for people who use productivity tools like Microsoft® Office and who surf the web, maybe listen to music and look at their photos
• VISION – Premium is for those who also want to watch High-definition and Blu-rays, edit photos and play some games
• VISION – Ultimate is for the video editor and 3D game player

We are also going to enable a VISION – Black edition for our technology partners who build the high-end, top of the line systems.

There is a lot more to VISION than I can capture in one blog – I am sure I will be doing others.

Just in case you were worrying, VISION Technology from AMD will extend to desktops early next year and your retailers will be able to tell you what parts went into your VISION system (it will be on the fact tags).

In the end it is about getting you the right machine for your needs because it’s about making your vision a reality.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

From a sampling of almost 1,700 PCMag digital subscribers, they asked netbook buyers whether they would instead consider purchasing an ultra-thin laptop, which has a bigger screen, faster processor and larger keyboard but costs on average $200 – $400 more. Only about a third of those asked said they would still by a netbook.

So, what do we learn from this?

I think it’s fair to takeaway that price is driving the growth of the ultra-thin vs. the netbook segment, with those willing to pay for it getting more for their money in the form of an ultra-thin notebook, and those unwilling to getting a netbook’s more limited functionality instead.  Of the 66 percent of the respondents who either weren’t sure or who outright would consider an ultra-thin system, we think something like the HP dv2 and its bigger form factor is worth a look.

But it gets more interesting when considering the data plans that are increasingly associated with netbooks, with BusinessWeek pointing out earlier this year that the total cost of ownership over two years for an otherwise discounted netbook could reach $1,440.  That doesn’t include the price ― discounted, but still ― of the device.  So now we’re talking more than $1,600. 

For a netbook.

Is that real computing at a realistic price?

The truth is that most mainstream users actually don’t really care what processor is in their PC.  This isn’t the case for the performance-centric enthusiast, but they make up a very small part of the market. The rest of us care primarily about the user experience, what the system is going to deliver on a daily basis in real-world use scenarios.

Taken together, the PCMag survey data and the BusinessWeek article should be food for thought for anyone in the market for a reasonably-priced new mobile system.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied

Similarly, netbooks may look like notebooks, but ― as we’ve previously pointed out ― they’re not the same.

NPD released a survey last week finding that 60% of consumers who purchased a netbook thought it would have the same performance as a notebook. Additionally, out of the 18-24 year old demographic – a major segment for netbooks – an astounding 65% said they bought their netbooks expecting better performance.

It’s no wonder that some netbook resellers saw a 30% return rate, as reported by Brooke Crothers at CNET.

Clearly, there is confusion in the market over the functionality of a netbook. And I don’t blame the consumer.

So what do we do? BusinessWeek’s Olga Kharif wrote a call to action for PC makers and retailers to better explain the difference in netbooks’ and notebooks’ capabilities. Speaking from personal experience, she writes, “I loved using [my netbook] to quickly check Hotmail or to watch a video off of YouTube. But try multitasking, such as downloading a photo or a document while streaming a video off of YouTube, and their performance falls off the cliff. Consumers need to be made aware of this before they make their purchases.” 

In some cases, consumers may even encounter problems during normal Web surfing. Many Websites now have video or flash right on their homepage. If you’re a parent buying a netbook for your kid, try loading Disney.com.

As with battery life, we think the PC industry has a role in helping consumers make educated decisions. In fact, Best Buy calls out on their Website that, “Netbooks may look like laptops, but they don’t have the full capabilities of a computer.”

What I also find interesting about the NPD survey is that the percentage of consumers who bought a netbook expecting the performance of a notebook closely parallels the percentage of netbooks that never leave the home (60% according to NPD). To me, this signifies that there is an opportunity in the market for a higher-performance product that is inexpensive and lightweight, satisfying consumers’ desire for a small, powerful machine while not disappointing on performance.

Of course, AMD’s response is the “ultrathin” category. If you’re looking for a lightweight, sleek laptop that is still powerful enough to handle your day to day activities, we recommend you check out the HP Pavilion dv2, powered by the AMD Athlon™ Neo processor for ultrathin notebooks. 

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

In short, it can be a fool’s errand.  And this is why it’s so important to see the bigger picture around share changes and not rush to judgment.

We reported earnings last week, and subsequently we’ve seen some comments questioning our competitiveness. So more to address the naysayers who may not see the larger picture of our competitive new products and platforms – and with the full understanding that market share trends may change next quarter (because that’s the nature of the beast) – here is some good news: in the CPU market, according to Mercury Research, AMD took about an overall 4% share gain in Q1 in microprocessors (CPU unit sales).

Both our desktop and notebook businesses took between 3.5% and 4% share gain. Our server business didn’t do as well, losing about 1%. Again, that’s the nature of this business.

So, given all the caveats, why say anything – right? Heck, why not?

Good news is always welcome.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

Along the same lines, the early reviews of the HP Pavilion dv2 try to shoehorn the product into one of two existing categories: netbook or full-size notebook. However, the truth is it is neither. It has the functionality of a mainstream notebook, but in a sleeker and ultraportable form factor, made possible with AMD’s platform for ultrathin notebooks.

The ultrathin dv2 is literally in-between.

When consumers are looking to purchase a laptop, I think there are five things they should consider: form factor, user experience, battery life, processing power, and of course their budget.  Let’s see how the dv2 rates relative to other systems I’ve used recently.

Head to Head

This feedback is based on how the dv2 fared during my week of travel:

-      Form factor:

o   The HP Pavilion dv2 is light and ideal for traveling, weighing in at less than four pounds.

o   Compared to other machines I’ve taken on trips over the last year, the dv2 was noticeably lighter.

-      User experience:

o   The dv2 has about 92% of a standard keyboard, and with a very responsive trackpad was very easy to use.

o   The dv2 also delivered strong audio with internal Altec Lansing stereo speakers, which was noticeably an improvement over mono speakers that are not ideal for playing music.

o   In terms of discrete graphics, the dv2 delivered stunning picture quality on both a standard size monitor and the laptop. 

o   Another secret to a great user experience is a wireless wide area network. I was able to take the battery off and plug in a 3G network card in the back. Makes it the perfect “cloud” client.

o    Lastly, my HP Pavilion dv2 is equipped with Windows 7, which is as great of a client user experience as you can get (getting close to OS X).

-      Battery life:

o   As we know it’s all about how you use your machine.  The HP Pavilion dv2’s battery life clocked in at more than 3 hours with normal day-to-day use.

o   I didn’t do the MM07 tests – see other blogs.

-      Processor:

o   The AMD Athlon™ Neo processor and ATI Radeon™ graphics in the HP Pavilion dv2 were great for watching videos in HD (720p). It also performed well when multi-tasking.

o   I typically had two or three windows open; one for Twitter, one for email, and one for MLB.com to keep up with the Yankees.

o   I didn’t experience any lag.

-      Price:

o   People typically have a set budget, and they look for laptops within that budget that best meet their particular requirements.

o   Typical high-end ultraportables cost on the higher end of the price scale and might be outside the realm of some budgets. The HP Pavilion dv2 delivers the functionality of a mainstream notebook but in a sleek, highly portable form factor — and starting at around $749 MSRP.

All things considered, it’s not hard to see why I favor the HP dv2. As more ultrathin notebooks become available, I believe the industry will look back and consider the AMD processor-based HP Pavilion dv2 revolutionary.  I think we’re looking at the future of mainstream notebooks.

The HP Pavilion dv2 is a great example of the AMD Fusion philosophy in practice, illustrating our unique ability to marry our customers’ aspirations with our technology to produce an innovative solution. We recognized that there were consumers who wanted a lightweight, stylish notebook without the netbook’s compromises ― and at an affordable price point.  From this the AMD platform for ultrathin notebooks was born.

Down the road, I think we may even see ultrathin portable notebooks replace full-size notebooks as the mainstream choice for the market.

If you want to take part in the next generation of notebook computing, click here to order your own HP Pavilion dv2.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

It goes something like this: “MobileMark®07 is the one everyone uses and it shows how long the battery will last at idle. I understand that’s not the battery life I’ll experience when actually using the system, but isn’t it useful to show how long it will stay on?”

Is that how we want to show a PC’s battery life – while it is effectively doing nothing? It does allow you to say, “Hey, if I do nothing with it, it will last all day!”

But that’s as useful as the answer to these questions:

• How long does your cell phone last if you never make a call?
• How much memory do you need on a DVR if you never record anything?
• How many messages can I get on my answer-phone if no one calls?
• How much music can my iPod hold if I don’t download anything?
• How many miles to the gallon do you get when your car is sitting in your driveway?

Answer: It really doesn’t matter.

Isn’t the point of a phone to make and receive calls, a DVR to record TV and a car to get you places? Surely the point of a PC is to do some, well, personal computing.

What do we call a PC that does nothing all day? A battery soak. (Guess that’s not as sexy.)

That’s why we have suggested two battery metrics: active and resting (or idle). Next time I buy a PC this is what I would like to see:

Wouldn’t that be a more helpful guide?

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

It has been interesting to watch the reaction to my recent blog on battery life (if you haven’t yet read that, I suggest you do before proceeding – click here).

 Generally the feedback falls into three groups:

·         Those who support our position;

·         Those who don’t see the need for a change; and

·         Those who agree with the premise but not the proposed solution.

I thought it would be useful to review the discussion and I’d also like to say a little more about what we plan to do next.

The Support Group

It has been very interesting to see how much discussion one blog has created.

My favorite response, not surprisingly, was Darren Murph of Engadget, who suggested that the market should, “… give a serious high five to senior VP and CMO Nigel Dessau on this one.” Thanks – not many of those, so I will take them where I can.

Darren like others also commented on the difference between the MobileMark® 07 (MMO7) and 3DMark06 approaches. As Ed Hansberry from InformationWeek reported, “the tests that AMD is proposing show numbers 42% to 64% lower than current tests show, but at least the tests are closer to simulating real-life usage.”

And this from TechSpot’s Justin Mann, “Dessau calls for a change in industry standards, including ones found in programs like 3DMark06, to give better estimates on battery life. It’s an interesting blog post, and I imagine he’s only one of many in the industry who can recognize the battery meter folly for what it really is.”

On involving consumers, Nedim Hadzic from Fudzilla noted, “While we’re sure that this trend will never stop as it almost goes without saying in the world of marketing, it certainly would be nice if consumers had a say in it for once, as it’s their cash that keeps the industry alive.”

Other asked why we were even bringing this subject up. Shawn Oliver on Hot Hardware explained that no one believes the battery numbers today anyway. He wrote, “[At 6.5 hours] we were just happy that the 1000HE came that close to meeting the ridiculous sounding claim of 9.5 hours, but Mr. Dessau doesn’t think that’s the best way to go about things. And truthfully, now that our eyes have been opened, neither do we.”

In a comment to my blog, John Clifford summed it up well, “I really hope the manufacturers of notebooks and cellphones will start getting more real and transparent about battery life.”

You can read more on the discussion on Icrontic; Cliff Forster is leveraging the community to encourage a “collective effort” to address “the myth of laptop battery life.”

No Need for Change

Given that high-tech is an industry about change, I found it ironic that some suggested there was no reason to change.  Yet, some seem happy with the status quo.

Vijay commented that MM07 used in several independent reviews is, “a hell (of a) lot better than any of those battery life claims made on the notebooks by the manufacturers.”  I think this misses the point as MM07 is not done the same way by each manufacturer even though it is typically what manufactures cite ― and that’s just confusing. 

And I did point out that we weren’t suggesting MM07 is not a useful benchmark.

William Maher of PC Authority wrote, “Nigel, we admire your efforts, but the real problem is getting the industry to adopt a more accurate method. AMD can talk all it likes about 3DMark, but until the notebooks manufacturers all agree on a better system, then we’ll still see misleading numbers.” I’m hoping this doesn’t suggest we should just give up.

On the subject of giving up, our competitor’s stated response to our suggestion that the industry needed to embrace a discussion about this issue was, “the best way to determine how to measure battery life is by making proposals and debating it in industry consortiums and not via blog post.” Noteworthy: this was first reported by The Wall Street Journal’s Don Clark in ― yes ― his blog.  It seemed to rub a few reporters (and readers) the wrong way.

Murph on Engadget blogged, “Oh Intel, could you possibly be any more corporate?” While Sylvie Barak of The Inquirer (am I quoting the Inquirer?) snapped back, “Does this imply Intel is suggesting we completely ignore corporate blogs? … Should we ignore Intel blogs from now on?” While Barak notes that without Intel coming to the table to discuss the issue there likely won’t be much traction, she does note, “a sit down for open discussion would certainly be a good thing.”

On Twitter, @IntelNick suggested we work through BAPCo. We do of course work with BAPCo but we also know, which @IntelNick undoubtedly also knows, that BAPCo is chaired by Intel and the group unfortunately does not seem in hurry to make any policy changes related to battery life information.

With all due respect, I submit that my blog did more to move the needle than BAPCo has in some time.

Right Idea, Wrong Benchmark

Many of those who posted comments to my blog expressed general support for the idea while exploring the question of what other factors should be included when measuring battery life. For example, John McElhenney commented that, “In terms of reporting battery performance, doesn’t some of the problem originate with the battery itself?” Snappy commented that it would be, “meaningful to show suspend battery life.”

And there was misunderstanding as to why we chose 3DMark06. Some lost sight of the fact that 3DMark06 highly utilizes the processor in a repeatable way (which MM07 does not), and instead focused on the fact that 3DMark06 is a graphics performance metric. For example, Jimmy Tang commented, “I think the idea of using 3DMark06 is only addressing a tiny aspect of battery life, and that is gaming. We all know very well that when you run the machine with full 3D graphics, you’re only going to load the GPU.”

But our intent was to drive toward a model that emphasizes utilization of the system – we believe the industry needs something that drives the systems more than 5% (which is what MM07 does).

Others wanted a broader rage of metrics. Bryan Bartow posted a comment suggesting a more flexible approach would be good and that he would, “love to see a suite of benchmarking apps that emulate several different typical usage profiles. For example, Home, Work and Play.”

In the end many echoed Cliff Forster who suggested, “Surely, an independent organization to test battery claims can not be too far off.”

So, What’s Next?

We are working with a number of our OEM partners to get their views and further encourage the discussion. Like Cliff Forster, we believe that there is a role for an independent organization, and we hope that could be BAPCo. I will keep you up to date with how that is going.

Also you can ask BAPCo yourself – visit their website here; I am sure John Peterson the BAPCo Operations Manager would love to hear from you. J

At the end of the day, our aim is to support consumers in the most transparent way. Ed Hansberry at InformationWeek for one hopes we succeed and that we make, “some progress getting other manufacturers to use more reliable battery tests for mobile computers and that the cell phone industry will take note and give us better tests for modern smartphones that more closely mimic their real-world usage patterns.”

As I said earlier, high-tech is about change and progress, and this too will pass. As pepoluan suggests in a comment on my blog, “I personally look forward to the day when fully-charging a laptop’s battery takes no more than 1 minute.”

Amen to that.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

Case in point: Microsoft.

Apple had their day with their catchy “I’m a Mac” commercials and Microsoft responded with “I’m a PC.” To me that campaign reinforced Apple’s differentiation but didn’t always clearly connect to the needs of the PC user. Now, Microsoft is stealing some thunder with its “Laptop Hunters” campaign, starting with a new ad that’s had everyone talking. 

The premise of the campaign is simple — Microsoft’s advertising agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky recruited prospective shoppers in the Los Angeles area with an offer to buy a new laptop in the range of $700 to $2,000.  Whatever money they didn’t spend, they get to keep.

In the first commercial, a seemingly average person named Lauren wants to find a laptop that costs no more than $1000 and meets three simple requirements: speed, a comfortable keyboard and a 17-inch screen. Lauren first visits an Apple store, only to leave disappointed because the least expensive laptop is $1,000 and has only a 13-inch screen. “I’m just not cool enough to be a Mac person,” she says as she drives to Best Buy.  Once there she surveys the bevy of laptops within her budget and (success!) settles on the HP Pavilion dv7z featuring the AMD Turion™ Ultra X2 processor, priced at $699.

So why does the first “Laptop Hunters” commercial have everyone fired up? Clearly, Microsoft has a successful value proposition that differentiates the PC from the Mac.  But what I find more interesting is the campaign’s focus on the user’s needs rather than the technology.

The User Experience

I admire how this commercial captures the typical consumers’ current mindset: low cost, high value ― and how it’s about the experience (speed, comfort, monitor size). Just as Lauren was presented with a challenge to find her perfect laptop at an affordable price, the entire computing industry is currently faced with the challenge of adapting to the changing customer preference for lower cost ― without compromise.

This commercial also speaks to my belief that today’s consumer isn’t interested in “geek speak” or being sold a product with more bells and whistles than he or she needs.  It works because it highlights what most consumers do when they are purchasing a new computer — identify the most important features, set a budget and find the best fit. Lauren knew the three things she cared about most, and once she found a PC with those features at the right price, she was ready to cheer excitedly in the parking lot.

Users want simplification and a straightforward way to identify which systems have the features they most care about ― and they want the best value for the money they’re spending.

Value Defined

Value is something AMD has always been committed to in its products. It didn’t take an economic meltdown to open our eyes — we’ve understood this from the debut of our platform for ultrathin notebooks that pack the performance of a pricey ultraportable in a sleek and stylish ― and affordable ― package like the HP Pavilion dv2, to the launch of the triple core AMD Phenom™ II X3 processors that offer an extra core of power for the price of competitive dual-core processors. 

We understand that value doesn’t mean “cheap.” It means getting what you want and need, and getting it for the best price. If you’re paying for more than you need (especially if you’re not getting what is most important to you!), then you’re not getting value for your money.

It’s not surprising that Lauren chose the HP Pavilion dv7, 2008 AMD platform for mainstream notebook PCs featuring AMD Turion™ X2 processor and ATI Radeon™ HD Graphics.  This system offers great multimedia capabilities, including HD Blu-Ray playback, manages everyday multitasking without hiccups, and demonstrated a battery life of 3 hours and 21 minutes on CNET’s video playback battery drain test (which is a decent metric of real world usage scenarios), and all for under $1,000.

So how do I Get One?

To celebrate the outcome of Lauren’s laptop hunt, we’re giving away two HP Pavilion dv7s so two lucky winners can pump their fists excitedly in a parking lot like Lauren! To enter, become a follower of @AMD_Unprocessed on Twitter and tell us why the HP Pavilion dv7 is just what you want between 4/3 at 12:01 AM ET and 4/19 at 11:59 PM ET using #AMDcontest.  Two winners will be selected at random and announced by @AMD_Unprocessed on 4/20. Click here for contest rules.

Good luck to all you laptop hunters.  If you don’t win, I suggest you consider the HP dv2 – I managed to secure one and I can assure you it provides a great experience.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.

I think we all accept the idea that there is not one answer to the question, “how many miles to the gallon?” We understand you need to ask whether the reference is to city or highway miles.  As a member of my team puts it, there are “guard-rails” between which we know our cars operate.

In the same vein, I think we are talking about battery life all wrong. In our discussions at AMD and our messaging on the subject, we’re going about it in the wrong way.  And we’re not alone – see Rob Enderle’s thoughts on the matter here.

Have you experienced a difference between your devices’ actual battery life relative to what the manufacturer tells you to expect?  I thought so.

I find people often ask what my battery life is on my 3G iPhone, and I tell them I don’t know because I always try and keep it charged. If you ask Apple they will tell you the 3G model has 300 hours of standby time but only about 5 hours of talk time – and less it you activate Wi-Fi, GPS or other features.

Given this, it’s interesting to look at how PCs are rated on battery life. Typically you only get one number ― and most people have no idea what that number really means in terms of how they will actually use the device: is it city or highway, talk-time or standby? More to the point: does this number represent the PC’s battery life with the machine in use, or sitting idle?

Most PC battery time metrics are achieved by looking at how long the battery lasted running a benchmark called MobileMark® 2007 (MMO7). This is a rating of battery life when your PC is running on average less than 5% utilized – or fundamentally idle. Most PC makers don’t even turn Wi-Fi on for this test. Is this realistic based on how you use your PC?

Like highway or standby – most MM07-based battery numbers are the “best case scenarios” in which your machine is doing nothing. Not that the MM07 benchmark isn’t useful; it’s just that it only tells part of the story. It’s just one guard-rail ― shouldn’t there be another? 

If I want to know how long my battery is going to last, I want to know how long it’s going to last with me using it, not with it idle or doing nothing.

For this reason, we propose that the industry needs another test to measure battery life, and we would like to propose adoption of the industry-standard 3DMark06 benchmark. The reason I like the sound of 3DMark06 is that it uses more graphics, it runs on Microsoft Windows XP and Windows Vista, and, most importantly, it runs the machine at a higher overall system utilization than other industry-standard benchmarks.

I asked my team to dig a bit on this and we decided to test some PCs with both MM07 and 3DMark06 and see what the results would be. See the table below with some of the relevant test details. AMD’s Hal Speed is also posting a blog to show you what the test scripts were so you can do this for yourself.

	OEM System Comparison #1		OEM System Comparison #2		OEM System Comparison #3
Processor	AMD Turion™ X2 Ultra Dual-Core Processor	Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor	AMD Turion™ X2 Ultra Dual-Core Processor	Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor	AMD Turion™ X2 Dual-Core Processor	Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor
Processor Sku	ZM-82	P8400	ZM-82	P8400	RM-72	P7350
Battery Size	55Whr	55Whr	43Whr	43Whr	55Whr	55Whr
Graphics	ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 3200	Intel® GMA 4500M	ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 3450	NVIDIA GeForce™ 9600M GT	ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 3200	Intel® GMA 4500M
3DMark 06*	92	91	59	53	91	97
MobileMark 2007 (Productivity)*	169	206	103	148	210	167

*numbers represent battery life in minutes

As you can see, on similar machines, while the typical idle metric on one machine shows that we may have an underperforming system, when that machine is in use it achieves similar if not identical battery life.

Are we suggesting people should abandon the MM07 idle metric for the 3DMark06 busy metric? Actually: no. Like talk and standby or city and highway, we think both should be cited to provide the buyer with a more informed purchasing process.  Perhaps next time we test using MMO7 we’ll enable Wi-Fi to make it a more realistic, “active,” reading.

In any event, when we talk about battery life in the future, we intend to give both MMO7 and 3DMark06 — and we hope others will follow suit.

Now the cynics and the wiser-than-thou will tell you that we are only doing this because our idle battery life is not as good or that we should use something other than 3DMark06. To them I say:  Let’s engage in a discussion, and if you find a better test on “active” use than 3DMark06, we would love to discuss it with you!  Let’s work together.

The issue is we are not being entirely honest with users about what PC battery life they can expect to actually experience.  Shouldn’t we, as an industry, try and fix that?

We think so.

Nigel Dessau is senior vice president and chief marketing officer at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links sites and no endorsement is implied.