A new Intel Core i9-10980HK processor has been spotted in a Gigabyte Aorus 17X YB laptop on Geekbench 5. The chip managed a single-core score of 1,352 points and a multi-core score of 8,386 points. The results are very similar to those of an AMD Ryzen 7 4800H in an Asus TUF Gaming laptop, but the Comet Lake processor can rely on a much higher power draw than the Renoir APU.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i9-10980HK-practically-ties-with-AMD-Ryzen-7-4800H-in-Geekbench-5-comparison-but-there-is-a-huge-power-difference.460750.0.html
LOL. 135W Intel almost reached 65W AMD. What a time we live in...
You are slowly becoming a "scandal newspaper".
You are stating in the title something and in the article you say: "The AMD Ryzen 7 4800H was tested on Geekbench 5.1, which offers higher scores than Geekbench 5.0 where the Intel Core i9-10980HK was benchmarked"
So that means that 4800H has an artificially inflated score, but you miss this point in your title. Great. Amazing journalism.
Not to say 4800H is a bad product, but press is far from being OBJECTIVE these days.
Yet on the low end, the Intel chip can actually use as low as 5-10w where the AMD can only go as low as 20-30w. Also, you have to let us know the working power when the benchmarks are taken, not theoratical maximum.
The performance are very close, but the important thing to note is the price of laptops here.
a typical laptop with a i9-10980HK would cost around $2500+ , while a laptop with a ryzen 4800H would cost around $1000~. Good job amd
QuoteYet on the low end, the Intel chip can actually use as low as 5-10w where the AMD can only go as low as 20-30w
LOL Even 2500u which is 3y old can go to 3W... man you know nothing. You are of course right that intel can go lower with power. But for sure your numbers are from sky.
2020 is a laptops cpu revolution.
btw look at this guy
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/26405550
its like winning in the lottery, look at these percentiles :)
Anyone else wondering why they're comparing an i9 to the Ryzen 7 model and not the Ryzen 9? Surely the Ryzen 9 would be the i9's competitor and not the Ryzen 7. Why not compare it to the 4900H which has also had specs and benchmarks released?
Quote from: Josh on April 10, 2020, 15:55:09
Why not compare it to the 4900H which has also had specs and benchmarks released?
4800 and 4900 are the same. ask su and robert "4.75ghz" hallock why they did it.
Quote from: Hao Ruan on April 10, 2020, 10:47:59
Yet on the low end, the Intel chip can actually use as low as 5-10w where the AMD can only go as low as 20-30w. Also, you have to let us know the working power when the benchmarks are taken, not theoratical maximum.
Wow, that's a really useful feature for all the people who buy a performance laptop to let it sit idle all day.
Quote from: fdsofldmos on April 10, 2020, 10:24:02
You are slowly becoming a "scandal newspaper".
You are stating in the title something and in the article you say: "The AMD Ryzen 7 4800H was tested on Geekbench 5.1, which offers higher scores than Geekbench 5.0 where the Intel Core i9-10980HK was benchmarked"
So that means that 4800H has an artificially inflated score, but you miss this point in your title. Great. Amazing journalism.
Not to say 4800H is a bad product, but press is far from being OBJECTIVE these days.
I don't think that minor difference in version (0.1) can result in significant score increase. Sure there are tests whose values might be calculated little differently but final result will be simiilar, that's how semantic versioning goes and I am sure Geekbench adheres such philosophy.
Out of curiosity I dug up Geekbench and found this test of AMD with 5.04
search this id 1594373
Scores are simillar and difference is more of a test variation (IMHO).
And still compares to Intel in source of that article.
1732292?baseline=1594373
so this is real response for now. Intel you think you can people buy your stuff at double the power and cost