The Lenovo Yoga 7 14 confirms AMD's advantage in the mobile segment

[Redaktion]

Notebooks with the new Ryzen 7 6800U are still rare, but the Lenovo Yoga 7 14 once again confirms that AMD's current mobile processors are better compared to Intel in terms of CPU and iGPU performance as well as efficiency. The convertible is also really good in other regards except for the sound system.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-Lenovo-Yoga-7-14-confirms-AMD-s-advantage-in-the-mobile-segment.646936.0.html

[Itai Fisher]

I like your through reviews but one key aspects missing are dependency on power profiles and battery performance.

In tests I conducted, AMD consistently shows over 30% drop in performance when on battery vs Intel's moderate drop of around 12%.

In addition, selecting the balanced vs high performance has significant impact on performance (and battery life).

Finally, with an Intel based system, one can use 3rd party tools to tweak power management settings to a much larger level and significantly improve performance. I haven't seen an equivalent tool for AMD.

Finally, I would love to see you compare browser performance and more real life performance testing for office and content creation. Especially on ultrabooks it would make more sense to test business applications doing typical business tasks.

[Andyroyasf]

Not true. Intel power efficiency is horrible. That is one reason Apple abandoned intel processers

[NikoB]

Firstly, the comparison is mathematically incorrect - devices with different hardware are compared. Secondly, if you look at the graphs, when the SoC performance in CBR15 is stabilized (this is more likely by 1260p, and in 6800, as can be clearly seen, it continues to fall on each next cycle and we do not see the end of the graph, where it really stabilizes horizontally ..) so if you evaluate the total consumption of laptops in the load CBR15, it is clear that the difference is only 23-24%.

Now let's recall that TSMC writes about  technical processes - TSMC assured that 7nm+ is 40-45% more energy-efficient than 10nm++++ from Intel. What happens? And it turns out exactly what I wrote about 2 years ago - Intel cores are definitely more energy-efficient in absolute numbers with amendments to the technical processes used, but AMD, thanks to access to TSMC (and on time of turning into fabless company), gets some kind of advantage. But what will happen if both Intel and AMD begin to do their processors on the same TSMC conveyors? Here everything will clearly not become in favor of the AMD.

On the other hand, the AMD year after year produces "paper" or "virtual" processors, which appear as mass laptops in the best case, in retail (widely around the world on any "counter") after 8-9 months not early, just by the time when Intel is already released a new series, which actually ends up in retail 2-3 months from the date of the announcement. And only starting with Alder Lake Intel began to bargain with their production and accessibility (I don't know what reasons) and began to produce "paper" processors, which become really available to the mass laptops only six months later.

On the third party - Intel also keeps more than 70% of the mobile SoC market and collects all profit from the market like Apple, and AMD is still less profitable and not able (thanks fabless company) to increase SoC supply from TSMC, because quotas are finite there, and 3nm and still has not taken by AMD, unlike Apple.

While AMD is panting, Intel receives all the money ...

[Russel]

Firstly, the comparison is mathematically incorrect - devices with different hardware are compared. Secondly, if you look at the graphs, when the SoC performance in CBR15 is stabilized (this is more likely by 1260p, and in 6800, as can be clearly seen, it continues to fall on each next cycle and we do not see the end of the graph, where it really stabilizes horizontally ..) so if you evaluate the total consumption of laptops in the load CBR15, it is clear that the difference is only 23-24%.

Now let's recall that TSMC writes about  technical processes - TSMC assured that 7nm+ is 40-45% more energy-efficient than 10nm++++ from Intel. What happens? And it turns out exactly what I wrote about 2 years ago - Intel cores are definitely more energy-efficient in absolute numbers with amendments to the technical processes used, but AMD, thanks to access to TSMC (and on time of turning into fabless company), gets some kind of advantage. But what will happen if both Intel and AMD begin to do their processors on the same TSMC conveyors? Here everything will clearly not become in favor of the AMD.

On the other hand, the AMD year after year produces "paper" or "virtual" processors, which appear as mass laptops in the best case, in retail (widely around the world on any "counter") after 8-9 months not early, just by the time when Intel is already released a new series, which actually ends up in retail 2-3 months from the date of the announcement. And only starting with Alder Lake Intel began to bargain with their production and accessibility (I don't know what reasons) and began to produce "paper" processors, which become really available to the mass laptops only six months later.

On the third party - Intel also keeps more than 70% of the mobile SoC market and collects all profit from the market like Apple, and AMD is still less profitable and not able (thanks fabless company) to increase SoC supply from TSMC, because quotas are finite there, and 3nm and still has not taken by AMD, unlike Apple.

While AMD is panting, Intel receives all the money ...

So. What's the point you want to make?

Intel had the battery consumption advantage before ryzen 4000 series was released.
They had it for ages.
And amd improved by miles compared to bulldozer and then by miles compared to zen1 and zen +.
Good for tech, good for consumers.


Intel was the only option in laptops not too long ago. That's no longer the case and amd is the better choice for thin and light laptops.
Intel still has the advantage of familiarity for the masses due to years of intel inside and core i7 is the best advertising.
And they're still selling more.
Nothing to do with technological advancements.
That should be a in a website for shareholders, not here.


Intel being competitive is good too, because monopoly causes tech stagnancy, like it did when amd was irrelevant during the bulldozer era or more aptly, the eternal quadcore intel era..

[RobertJasiek]

amd is the better choice for thin and light laptops.

This statement is too general. It depends on
- security (Meltdown, Spectre etc.)
- speed
- efficiency
- battery life depending on speed
- features
Everybody should decide on his needs.

[Joakim]

Please update your article I can confirm that Thunderbolt works with Lenovo Yoga 7 14 ARB7 + eGPU.

Unfortunately I can´t share the link but check out
egpu.io/forums/builds/2022-lenovo-yoga-7-14arb7-680m-r6k8cu-6800xt-32gbps-usb4-razer-core-x-win11/#post-102476

Regards,
Joakim