Kaveri APUs land in three HP EliteBook laptops

Well, that didn’t take long. The mobile version of Kaveri launched last night, and HP has already announced a trio of business notebooks based on it. Say hello to the Elite 700 series.

The three systems are the 12.5" EliteBook 725, the 14" EliteBook 745, and the 15.6" EliteBook 755. All three of ’em are outfitted with AMD’s new Pro APUs, which have 17-19W thermal envelopes fit for ultrabook-style systems. And indeed, HP says the new EliteBooks are only 0.83-0.85" thick, depending on the model.

Other perks for these machines include optional touch-screen technology, optional LTE wireless connectivity (only on the EliteBook 725), and optional 1920×1080 screen resolutions across the board. The EliteBook 745 and 755 can also be ordered with 1600×900 displays.

When these systems become available in June, starting prices will be $799, $739, and $749 for the EliteBook 725, 745, and 755, respectively. Yes, the smallest one will be the priciest of the bunch—though the differences aren’t exactly big.

Comments closed
    • slaimus
    • 6 years ago

    Do these Pro APUs have FirePro features enabled?

    • smilingcrow
    • 6 years ago

    This is HP so they’ll probably discontinue them before they even ship.

    • drfish
    • 6 years ago

    The 12.5″ looks mighty fine. Finally we’re seeing AMD’s most interesting mobile chips in a decent system.

    • clocks
    • 6 years ago

    I wish the 15.6″ version came with a full keyboard (i.e.number pad). Guess I’m just old fashioned that way.

    • NeelyCam
    • 6 years ago

    That 12.5in looks pretty interesting! How heavy is it?

    *checks spec sheet*

    [quote<]"Weight: Weight will vary by configuration"[/quote<] Mmm.. that's not a good sign...

      • hbarnwheeler
      • 6 years ago

      I went looking for the same information.
      The spec sheet for the 14″ reads, “Starting at 3.48 lb / 1.58 kg (weight will vary by configuration)”.
      The spec sheet for the 15.6″ reads, “Starting at 4.4 lb/2 kg (weight will vary by configuration)”.

      If the difference comes down to the screen, the 12.5 should come in at ~2.5lb on the low end, though that seems too good to be true (unless the battery stinks). Though, given that even the 15.6″ can be had with the 3-cell (24 WHr) battery, maybe it won’t be too bad.

        • clocks
        • 6 years ago

        It says it this link in the picture for the 12.5″ “starting at 3lbs”.

        [url<]http://www8.hp.com/us/en/ads/elite-amd-products/elitebook-725-745-755.html[/url<]

          • hbarnwheeler
          • 6 years ago

          Weird, the weight values in the photos are different from those in the spec sheets for the 14″ and 15.6″.

      • raddude9
      • 6 years ago

      NPFUD

        • NeelyCam
        • 6 years ago

        What does NP mean in NPFUD?

          • raddude9
          • 6 years ago

          Neely’s Pre-emptive

      • chuckula
      • 6 years ago

      I’d be like: Weight will vary based on local gravitational field strength.

      Interplanetary computing FTW.

        • NeelyCam
        • 6 years ago

        Well at least they could’ve let us know what the mass is.

        I feel like they’re hiding something. Presumably because AMD “APUs” are so inefficient that they have to be bolted onto a massive battery to get “full day battery life” (i.e., 8h of idling)

          • raddude9
          • 6 years ago

          NPFUD again.

            • NeelyCam
            • 6 years ago

            Haha; you know – I wrote that post specifically for you, because I had a feeling you wouldn’t be able to resist replying..

            But no hard feelings. Wanna be my friend?

            • raddude9
            • 6 years ago

            I had a feeling you did, happy to oblige 🙂

            More than anything I’m curious as to why such a big and powerful company like intel can have such a legion of fanbois, that they’re not just happy to promote intel’s own products, they also like to spread fear and doubt about all their competitors products as well.

            • NeelyCam
            • 6 years ago

            I don’t think pointing out that weight is missing from a spec sheet should be considered “spreading FUD” in the strictest sense. Don’t you think it’s odd that they wouldn’t list weight in the spec sheet, considering how important it is for an ultraportable..?

            But if you look carefully, I’m an equal-opportunity hater. The Intel-based Dell “ultraportables” got thumbs down from me because of the weight. Curiously, I don’t recall seeing you say anything negative about an AMD product… even though I think we can both agree that there have been plenty of opportunities recently to do so.

            Could it be that you have green (or is it red now) blinders on when it comes to AMD’s product shortcomings…?

            • raddude9
            • 6 years ago

            [quote<]I don't think pointing out that weight is missing from a spec sheet should be considered "spreading FUD" in the strictest sense.[/quote<] If you had just pointed out that the weight was not in the spec sheet you would have been pointed to a page where they say that the wieight starts at 3lb, but you went on to say that it was "not a good sign..." implying that they are afraid to show the weight. FUD. [quote<]The Intel-based Dell "ultraportables" got thumbs down from me because of the weight. [/quote<] That's different, you had the exact weight for that, you were free to make a full judgement on what is too heavy in your opinion. [quote<]I'm an equal-opportunity hater.[/quote<] I don't think so, you give the intel based machines the benefit of the doubt and only "hate" on them when you have real evidence, but the AMD machine you condemn for the same problem [b<]without[/b<] evidence. [quote<]Curiously, I don't recall seeing you say anything negative about an AMD product...[/quote<] The intel fanbois always get in before me with their flood of negative comments before I get a chance. Anything I say would be superflouous.

    • stdRaichu
    • 6 years ago

    Physical trackpad buttons… option for a 1080 screen… 12.5″… so, so close to being a viable replacement for my 1810TZ. Here’s hoping the 3-cell battery is up to the task and the build quality is comparable to the rest of the Elitebook series.

    As I said in the last “where are all the ultraportables?”, I’m currently using an Elitebook 2170P which cost an utter fortune, only has a 136×768 screen and only gets 5hrs out of the battery, but these look like they could be the next best thing for all us old CULV die-hards.

      • NeelyCam
      • 6 years ago

      The spec sheet mentions HDDs.. I worry that the $799 starting price will be with a 500GB HDD and 1366×768 display.

        • stdRaichu
        • 6 years ago

        Almost certainly, I’m just hoping that the screen upgrade won’t cost the earth.

        Perfectly happy to accept a HDD config though, since it’s the first thing that gets removed and put in a box in case the laptop ever needs to go in for repair. My 2170P also came with a hideously-overpriced Micron SED option so that’s likely to be expensive here also, but the 256GB C300 I had lying around was a wonderfully cheap replacement 🙂

          • NeelyCam
          • 6 years ago

          [quote<]Perfectly happy to accept a HDD config though, since it's the first thing that gets remove[/quote<] Agreed, but if I need to buy and put in an SSD, I would sort of expect the baseline price to be a bit cheaper. Back last November I bought a well-built Lenovo Yoga ultrabook with an SSD for $750 (of course its GPU isn't competitive with this, but still...)

    • Geonerd
    • 6 years ago

    Good to see AMD actually selling something, hopefully in large numbers, for a change.

    • UnfriendlyFire
    • 6 years ago

    I’m interested in the battery option that they have. Potentially for the 745 and 755, you can combine a 3-cell 50 WHr battery with a 6-cell 60 WHr external battery slice.

    Aka, a whooping 110 WHr of battery capacity.

    Though I wonder how much will they charge for the batteries, especially the external battery slice?

    EDIT: A shame that the 725 is limited to a 46 WHr battery.

    • ptsant
    • 6 years ago

    If it can do some light gaming I’d be seriously tempted. Between “gaming” laptops, which are neither truly portable, neither particularly good at gaming and “business” ultrabooks that can’t run anything heavier than minesweeper, I think there is a nice little niche for a laptop with good-enough CPU and a GPU that is suitable for light gaming use (say, DOTA and indie games).

    The fact that, for once, AMD managed to get decent-looking designs is also positive. More competition is good.

      • odizzido
      • 6 years ago

      I have an old C50 and I find I can do light gaming on it. I can even run FEAR which is far more than I ever expected.

    • Ryhadar
    • 6 years ago

    I [b<]never[/b<] thought I would see AMD's performance laptop CPUs in a laptop smaller than 13". Heck, they're still putting Temash and Kabini in 15.6" to 17" systems! That's really cool and almost makes me wish I would have waited for the HP 725 over the MSI S12T that I bought 5 months ago. Then again, I needed a new laptop and I'm really happy with the S12T so I guess all's well that ends well.

    • chuckula
    • 6 years ago

    Interestly but…

    [quote<][i<]optional[/i<] 1920x1080 screen resolutions across the board. [/quote<] What does that upgrade do to price? Also: These are the new ultrabook-competitor Kaveri parts, which are very interesting but when TR had the chance to do a preview of mobile Kaveri, AMD intentionally chose to demo the 35-watt beefy parts and none of these lower-power parts were anywhere to be seen even though they appear to be launching this month. Bottom line: Let's get a full review of one of these bad boys!!

      • MadManOriginal
      • 6 years ago

      I poked around on the HP site briefly. The first laptop I found with a screen upgrade was a 14″ Evny. To go from 1366×768 to 1600×900 is only $40. The screen up grades might be reasonable…up to $100 might be reasonable to go from 1366×768 to 1920×1080 IPS wouldn’t be *too* bad.

        • gamoniac
        • 6 years ago

        About a year ago, I was checking out some HP laptops. Upgrading monitors from 768 to 1080 cost $50. I don’t expect them to be any more than that now.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This