Notebookcheck
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Pierre-Alexandre Sicart
« on: May 19, 2020, 14:17:14 »

Tiger Lake will accommodate LP-DDR5, though. Won't that count for something?

No, it really won't.

Unless you explain your claim, your answer isn't one. LP-DDR5 is supposed to be quite a bit faster than LP-DDR4X, so why wouldn't this matter at all?
Posted by: The Scott
« on: May 19, 2020, 13:08:11 »

“Pricing, then will be a key factor in determining Tiger Lake U's success.”

No. (Lack of) Availability of AMD APUs will determine Tiger Lake U’s success. It is hard for Intel to not succeed when there are so few mainstream AMD alternatives.

This is all the more true if indeed Lenovo has now reneged on offering the T14 with an AMD APU.
Posted by: Spunjji
« on: May 18, 2020, 15:24:05 »

The Intel iGPU does nice on synthetics, but not in games. I wouldn't make assumptions that it will be faster than Vega.

HUH? Unless you tested it yourself how would you even know.
Making these blanket statements with no proof is pretty stupid

He might not know for this specific platform, but it's been a long-standing rule that Intel GPUs have even more of an outsized artificial advantage in synthetic tests than AMD GPUs do. They've traditionally had far worse driver optimisation for real-world games, too.
Posted by: Buyer's remorse
« on: May 18, 2020, 12:44:42 »

When AMD release a zen 2 / 3 + rdna2 apu, it's going to be over for Intel. I don't really see much hope.
ryzen 2xxx igpu was 2x+ times faster than intel hd620.
intel sold 20x+ times more.


ryzen 2xxx had battery life efficiency issues tho, afaik and almost zero decent higher end design wins, barely used in any notebooks.

Tiger Lake will accommodate LP-DDR5, though. Won't that count for something?

No, it really won't.

Posted by: Sinocelt
« on: May 18, 2020, 09:15:06 »

Tiger Lake will accommodate LP-DDR5, though. Won't that count for something?
Posted by: CanuckTO
« on: May 18, 2020, 05:30:22 »

Click bait... "Ryzen 7 4800u unfazed"

"Remains to be seen"
Posted by: william blake
« on: May 17, 2020, 20:21:00 »

When AMD release a zen 2 / 3 + rdna2 apu, it's going to be over for Intel. I don't really see much hope.
ryzen 2xxx igpu was 2x+ times faster than intel hd620.
intel sold 20x+ times more.
Posted by: william blake
« on: May 17, 2020, 20:15:15 »

Quote
Whether that's enough to bridge the gap with the eight-core sixteen-thread Ryzen 7 4800U, though, remains to be seen.
tiger lake is the most empty hyped cpu arch ever.
Posted by: Buyer's remorse
« on: May 17, 2020, 17:52:55 »

When AMD release a zen 2 / 3 + rdna2 apu, it's going to be over for Intel. I don't really see much hope.

Intel gpu's might become actually viable in 2030. By that time we'll will all be on and using ARM anyway.
Posted by: Buyer's remorse
« on: May 17, 2020, 17:47:23 »

The Intel iGPU does nice on synthetics, but not in games. I wouldn't make assumptions that it will be faster than Vega.

HUH? Unless you tested it yourself how would you even know.
Making these blanket statements with no proof is pretty stupid

He's actually right. Surface Laptop 3 (1065G7) owner here and the iGPU sucks balls. Granted I've not tested any Renoir APU yet, and I'm sure it's not much better being integrated graphics. But I honestly can't imagine it being any worse than this. Seriously, this is barely any faster than UHD 630 graphics. On what planet are reviewers getting 2x perf.? Maybe on some Intel bias selected hand picked benchmarks. And I don't even play gpu heavy games anyway.

Worst case scenario, Vega iGPU are the exact same perf. they're still terrible considering the $600 price difference.
Posted by: MOFO
« on: May 17, 2020, 17:19:07 »

The Intel iGPU does nice on synthetics, but not in games. I wouldn't make assumptions that it will be faster than Vega.

HUH? Unless you tested it yourself how would you even know.
Making these blanket statements with no proof is pretty stupid
Posted by: john1752020
« on: May 17, 2020, 16:07:20 »

The Intel iGPU does nice on synthetics, but not in games. I wouldn't make assumptions that it will be faster than Vega.
Posted by: Tov
« on: May 17, 2020, 14:22:29 »

Can’t match the cheaper 4900HS anyway.
Posted by: Armer
« on: May 17, 2020, 12:53:21 »

More than GPU and multi-core performance I am interested if they managed to squeeze more performance on single-core workloads. I hardly ever run tasks that would require full multi-core load for extensive period of times on a laptop while almost everything you do require boost or slightly longer processing with single core so I am not bothered with that too much.
Posted by: Redaktion
« on: May 17, 2020, 10:15:23 »

A benchmark listing spotted by tipster @_rogame indicates that premium Tiger Lake U chips will run as high as 2.8 GHz. Whether that's enough to bridge the gap with the eight-core sixteen-thread Ryzen 7 4800U, though, remains to be seen.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/2-8-GHz-Tiger-Lake-U-chip-with-4-Willow-Cove-cores-and-8-threads-spotted-leaves-8-core-16-thread-4-2-GHz-Ryzen-7-4200U-unfazed.465735.0.html

 
» Impressum     Sprachen: Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Türkçe | Svenska