Expect Ryzen 7 4800U and Ryzen 5 4600U-powered Lenovo laptops, and expect them to crush whatever Intel is offering. Posted on the company's Weibo account, Lenovo has already shown what the two Ryzen 4000 series APUs are capable of.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-Ryzen-7-4800U-and-Ryzen-5-4600U-are-taking-Intel-to-the-cleaners-and-Lenovo-is-happy-to-brag-about-it.460891.0.html
yeah, good luck tiger lake.
Quote from: william blake on April 12, 2020, 22:08:21
yeah, good luck tiger lake.
There has got to be at least one person who believes Intel can still win. Their 10nm process takes even more energy than their 14nm, so unless if we are talking about U series laptops with the ability to dissipate 50W++, all to feed a pathetic quad core in an era of 6-8 cores, Intel will have made two consecutive stumbles in their last market. Last time around, their mobile chips bailed them out (technologically - we all know what their business people did, too). If Tiger Lake fails to even catch up with Renoir (which is using Zen2 + ancient Vega cores), then Intel is basically toast.
Let's look at it this way: Nvidia is confident enough to have cut down the old GTX1050 to serve as the MX350 for the time being, and it seems they will cut down the GTX1650 to serve as the MX450 in the future. We know OEM/ODMs aren't really pairing these with AMD APUs. ;)
The laptop being tested Xiaoxin 13 Pro does being sold elsewhere, it's Ideapad S540 13". NBC did a review on its predecessor.
The interesting part remained to be seen is that how they handle the sustained power on the 4800U, as per the AMD website it goes up to 25W but the laptop is very capable of handling 35W.
Quote from: jeremy on April 13, 2020, 00:54:54
Quote from: william blake on April 12, 2020, 22:08:21
yeah, good luck tiger lake.
There has got to be at least one person who believes Intel can still win. Their 10nm process takes even more energy than their 14nm, so unless if we are talking about U series laptops with the ability to dissipate 50W++, all to feed a pathetic quad core in an era of 6-8 cores, Intel will have made two consecutive stumbles in their last market. Last time around, their mobile chips bailed them out (technologically - we all know what their business people did, too). If Tiger Lake fails to even catch up with Renoir (which is using Zen2 + ancient Vega cores), then Intel is basically toast.
Let's look at it this way: Nvidia is confident enough to have cut down the old GTX1050 to serve as the MX350 for the time being, and it seems they will cut down the GTX1650 to serve as the MX450 in the future. We know OEM/ODMs aren't really pairing these with AMD APUs. ;)
as long as Intel can get 6 and 8 cores on tiger lake they will be fine since zen 2 has about a 4% ipc boost over skylake but ice lake has 18% more ipc than skylake and tiger is double digits increase over ice lake, so core per core amd wouldn't stand a chance with the improved yields and power efficiency
people in computer industry taut these bloody benchmark as if they are world. this processor is 10percent better and blaw-blaw. how does that 5-10 percent matter in real world.for extreme workstation or server class job it matters where it will cut 24hrs to 20 hrs. for gaming as long as your computer generates 40 fps it good enough without any scope of improvement. thats reason i faith only specviewperf because i use those engineering software. that too I check only to limit whether machine is workable or not rather than finding best. with that reason i went for fx8350 (many people at that time did) rather than i73700 and saved huge money with same real world performance and is happy even to date when this one can run almost all games and is far better than i73700 in most engineering software. would i have gone with these nonsense benchmarks, would have lost lots of money. therefore i suggest use your brain and evaluate whats your requirement instead of falling prey to these marketing benchmark numbers. 1100 and 1300 marks are all same in real world. it matters only when it is 1100 vs 11000. after 5 years both processors with 1100 and 1300 will be same as are fx8350 and i73700 now.
Quote from: k on April 13, 2020, 04:29:54
people in computer industry taut these bloody benchmark as if they are world. this processor is 10percent better and blaw-blaw. how does that 5-10 percent matter in real world.for extreme workstation or server class job it matters where it will cut 24hrs to 20 hrs. for gaming as long as your computer generates 40 fps it good enough without any scope of improvement. thats reason i faith only specviewperf because i use those engineering software. that too I check only to limit whether machine is workable or not rather than finding best. with that reason i went for fx8350 (many people at that time did) rather than i73700 and saved huge money with same real world performance and is happy even to date when this one can run almost all games and is far better than i73700 in most engineering software. would i have gone with these nonsense benchmarks, would have lost lots of money. therefore i suggest use your brain and evaluate whats your requirement instead of falling prey to these marketing benchmark numbers. 1100 and 1300 marks are all same in real world. it matters only when it is 1100 vs 11000. after 5 years both processors with 1100 and 1300 will be same as are fx8350 and i73700 now.
40 fps is good enough? wtf? maybe if you come from intel hd gaming and have low expectations
the thing is, if these benchmarks are real then the 4600U is 50% more powerful than the i7-10710U. (1500 vs 1000)
not 10%.
and this is AMD beating Intel, not the other way around, so the "it's cheaper!!" argument doesn't work here because AMD CPUs are faster AND cheaper.
Quote from: Alex544 on April 13, 2020, 05:21:39
40 fps is good enough? wtf? maybe if you come from intel hd gaming and have low expectations
the thing is, if these benchmarks are real then the 4600U is 50% more powerful than the i7-10710U. (1500 vs 1000)
not 10%.
and this is AMD beating Intel, not the other way around, so the "it's cheaper!!" argument doesn't work here because AMD CPUs are faster AND cheaper.
[/quote]
I understand k's sentiment, but as you said these are not small differences anymore. Additionally, according to Anandtech's Asus G14 review, Ryzen 4000 moves from idle frequency to max boost frequency twice as fast as 9th gen Intel, so it will feel snappier during most everyday tasks as well. And it uses much less power under load.
OK Lenovo, time to release a Thinkpad X1 Extreme AMD 4900H offering and replacement for yoga C940. Where are our high end AMD options?
All I can say is, too little too late.
The world's going to end anyway.
Quote from: jeremy on April 13, 2020, 00:54:54
There has got to be at least one person who believes Intel can still win.
I do. AMD might be significantly better performing and decrease heat dissipation and power use at the same time, but OEMs will still buy and release Intel chips in high-end options, leaving AMD for crap tier and middle tier only. SAME WITH LENOVO. They will include AMD only in T14 and X13 of all their devices, and these T14 and X13 will have low-end screens in comparison to Intel options, where you will be able to go for high resolution and better gamut.
That's the way it is. I don't know if these are long term contracts, bribes or incompetence, but this is the way these companies roll.
Quote from: kony on April 13, 2020, 08:37:06
Quote from: jeremy on April 13, 2020, 00:54:54
There has got to be at least one person who believes Intel can still win.
I do. AMD might be significantly better performing and decrease heat dissipation and power use at the same time, but OEMs will still buy and release Intel chips in high-end options, leaving AMD for crap tier and middle tier only. SAME WITH LENOVO. They will include AMD only in T14 and X13 of all their devices, and these T14 and X13 will have low-end screens in comparison to Intel options, where you will be able to go for high resolution and better gamut.
That's the way it is. I don't know if these are long term contracts, bribes or incompetence, but this is the way these companies roll.
Agreed. OEM's seemed to to have longterm contracts with intel to use only their cpu's in high-end variants compared to AMD.
If they're really bragging then we can expect next gen X1 Extreme and P1 to move to Ryzen then.
Quote from: kony on April 13, 2020, 08:37:06
Quote from: jeremy on April 13, 2020, 00:54:54
There has got to be at least one person who believes Intel can still win.
I do. AMD might be significantly better performing and decrease heat dissipation and power use at the same time, but OEMs will still buy and release Intel chips in high-end options, leaving AMD for crap tier and middle tier only. SAME WITH LENOVO. They will include AMD only in T14 and X13 of all their devices, and these T14 and X13 will have low-end screens in comparison to Intel options, where you will be able to go for high resolution and better gamut.
That's the way it is. I don't know if these are long term contracts, bribes or incompetence, but this is the way these companies roll.
You can't even imagine how much lobby Intel does to OEMs. Cause intel is 12x bigger than amd.
But look at the bright side, If you consumers continue to ask OEMs for Amd in high end laptops, and mid range with better screens and not Buying Intel systems, they will be Forced to build the laptops with Amd that consumers want, maybe from next year.
But people should ask for that...
Otherwise nothing will change and Intel has a lot of money to give.
Also amd gpus 5600m and 5700m will come soon, so people will have the equivalent of 2060 and 2070. Unfortunately they won't compete with nvidia's super...
So only the cosumers can change the current situation asking for better screens and high end devices with AMD
Looks like Apple is moving to Amd, on geekbench 5 there are a lot of imac pros with 3700x-3900x 3950x Ryzen.
These are very good news.
iMacPro1,1 Ryzen 3900x
1335
Single-Core Score
12279
Multi-Core Score
Probably Renoir will come soon also to MacBooks
The one killer for me in this is that I require TB3 and it is probably going to be hard to come by on AMD units. :(
Quote from: Padmakara on April 13, 2020, 12:55:24
Looks like Apple is moving to Amd, on geekbench 5 there are a lot of imac pros with 3700x-3900x 3950x Ryzen.
These are very good news.
iMacPro1,1 Ryzen 3900x
1335
Single-Core Score
12279
Multi-Core Score
Probably Renoir will come soon also to MacBooks
Those are Hackintoshes. Now that the kernel modification is done in Clover it's very easy to build one. Apple is going ARM. It's cool too though
Quote from: jeremy on April 13, 2020, 00:54:54
and it seems they will cut down the GTX1650 to serve as the MX450 in the future. We know OEM/ODMs aren't really pairing these with AMD APUs. ;)
well, if not mx450, 1650 max-q for me then.
Quote from: Sean stanek on April 13, 2020, 03:58:03
as long as Intel can get 6 and 8 cores on tiger lake they will be fine since zen 2 has about a 4% ipc boost over skylake but ice lake has 18% more ipc than skylake and tiger is double digits increase over ice lake, so core per core amd wouldn't stand a chance with the improved yields and power efficiency
ipc? energy efficiency IS laptop ipc. some say 8 tiger lake cores with higher clocks and more cache and double the graphics would be a monster?
nope. not in 15w package and not even in 45w.
Quote from: k on April 13, 2020, 04:29:54
1100 and 1300 marks are all same in real world. it matters only when it is 1100 vs 11000. after 5 years both processors with 1100 and 1300 will be same as are fx8350 and i73700 now.
10% is nothing. but 100% is all. double the performance/consumption/fps/time is big enough for an immediate buy and replacement.
Quote from: Padmakara on April 13, 2020, 11:46:17
Also amd gpus 5600m and 5700m will come soon, so people will have the equivalent of 2060 and 2070. Unfortunately they won't compete with nvidia's super...
you are joking right? super does not change anything. also i'd be very glad to hear some answers from mrs su about their laptop gpus, why there is ~none of them on the market.
(bad oem guys, i know i know)
Quote from: Me.me_Lord on April 13, 2020, 15:21:48
Those are Hackintoshes. Now that the kernel modification is done in Clover it's very easy to build one. Apple is going ARM. It's cool too though
latest mac pro is a true garbage coz of outdated cpu and gpu archs. im wondering which cpu would be in the next mac pro.
This is a good headline, but where are the products? When will they actually be for sale?
Quote from: kony on April 13, 2020, 08:37:06
Quote from: jeremy on April 13, 2020, 00:54:54
There has got to be at least one person who believes Intel can still win.
I do. AMD might be significantly better performing and decrease heat dissipation and power use at the same time, but OEMs will still buy and release Intel chips in high-end options, leaving AMD for crap tier and middle tier only.
Fortunately, Intel cannot have such binding contracts with each and every OEM/ODM. Thus, it is the duty of good tech review resources, such as Notebookchek, to provide with unbiased reviews and tests, and it would be a wise decision for us to make smart buying choice based on price and performance ratings regardless of the manufacturer brand. This will support good engineering rather than marketing culture, and benefit us as consumers.
@Alex544
40 fps is good enough? wtf? maybe if you come from intel hd gaming and have low expectations
the thing is, if these benchmarks are real then the 4600U is 50% more powerful than the i7-10710U. (1500 vs 1000)
not 10%.
and this is AMD beating Intel, not the other way around, so the "it's cheaper!!" argument doesn't work here because AMD CPUs are faster AND cheaper.
dear friend mind me even 50% fast benchmark won't really matter in real world i am telling because i am engg professional and use several workstations(work) and desktop. latest xeon, with pro graphics and 128gb ram is able to save only 30% time compared to my old home desktop with fx8350 ands 16gb ram with 1060 gaming graphics in ansys simulation. difference is there if you compare i3 type little processors with bemoth epyc, where difference may be like i3 not capable of running problem at all. but for high end processor time difference never replicate or even show patern of these synthetic benchmark. compare passmark of graphics card and tell me if card with twice benchmark is able to produce twice frame rate? answer is simple no.
Well...nobody mentions here that intel chips have built in graphics which are fine for most uses except gamers, who are going to buy graphics cards anyways...so in that case, go for the faster cheaper processor. But if not a gamer, intel still better choice.
Those of Intel allies they do not know the power of AMD, Its the hate of monopoly that Intel has been doing for over a decade. I'm using know a laptop with core i5 and since I bought it I have been waiting for this historical moment ( i.e. the best CPU and APU are from AMD ) it does not matter when the Ryzen laptop will be my main PC but it will be. Think pad + 4800HS
Quote from: G f on April 14, 2020, 09:29:27
But if not a gamer, intel still better choice.
intel is a technological outsider. power hungry or slow or both. please tell me how it could be "better choice"?
Quote from: G f on April 14, 2020, 09:29:27
Well...nobody mentions here that intel chips have built in graphics which are fine for most uses except gamers, who are going to buy graphics cards anyways...so in that case, go for the faster cheaper processor. But if not a gamer, intel still better choice.
These AMD Renoir processors in the article have integrated GPUs, they are double digit percent faster than intel 10th gen ice lakes and many times faster than 10th gen comet lakes.
Quote from: G f on April 14, 2020, 09:29:27
Well...nobody mentions here that intel chips have built in graphics which are fine for most uses except gamers, who are going to buy graphics cards anyways...so in that case, go for the faster cheaper processor. But if not a gamer, intel still better choice.
You are joking right?
1) People do more than just gaming, like photoshop, video encoding and the like. A dedicated GPU is often times overkill. Especially when you are on the go.
2) The cheaper CPU is the AMD one
3) AMD also offers more multicore performance at lower power usage
4) Even if a gamer wants a dedicated gpu, they still don't want their laptop to die in 1 hour when gaming on the go.