NotebookCHECK - Notebook Forum

Can you please review the ASUS Expertbook P5? It should have better cooling and mate IPS panel.

So 0% uplift for the CPU, and 0% for the GPU in real world application (not bullshit benchmark)

LOL ?

A bit surprised for once by the testing of apple to carrots....

You are comparing very different computers/CPUs, 28.6W vs 61.9W  (cf Cyberpunk power consumption result).
And you conclude: Oh, the 29W CPU is not as fast as the 62W CPU, 38 vs 50 FPS.

Sure, Sherlock, how impressive, it uses more than 2x the power consumption for +30% more fps. Is it worth it?
That's the equation Lunar lake is trying to solve. While you provide all the numbers, they are so far apart that it s hard to put things together and understand what is happening.

If you are interested in raw performance without being interested in the power consumption *in the same time* (which is a perfectly valid case study), then Lunar lake is NOT FOR YOU. Alder Lake or the new Zen 5 are better suited for you, there is nothing wrong about it. These architectures are optimized to provide the highest benchmark numbers.

Now, there are people like me who cares about getting an efficient machine, which is very responsive while consuming very little and is powerful enough. That's why I run my machine underclocked undervolted (with ThrottleStop), bypassing the boost clock entirely to avoid the +10% speed +100% power consumption which is not useful for my case.

Lunar lake should be tested vs other architecture at relatively similar power consumption (@30W, also @17W). Then your conclusion would be very different. You can also keep the current test, and explain to people if its for them or not, depending what they are looking for. Depending on the usuage, different profile to do the benchmarks are relevant. I think your review is missing this important point.

glad Intel fixed its performance per watt somewhat but what good is that benchmark when a 890m device gets better battery life (on WiFi and on full load), more performance, all with an equal size battery? this is why I never liked the shift to "performance per watt is so important" narrative spearheaded by Apple cultists and now everyone parrots it like it's the only benchmark to consider. if a comparable laptop can outmatch another in nearly every benchmark at a higher wattage AND still have better battery life when tested, isn't that ppw stat useless then? Looks like Ryzen AI APUs are a clear winner but props to Intel at least for bringing some competition in the iGPU and efficiency race.

Let's see if MINISFORUM releases a good product with AMD as it has done with the mini-PCs and we make real comparisons. Although the product that everyone is waiting for is the second part of MINISFORUM V3, you can search for it on YouTube.

Quote from: better at least on September 24, 2024, 17:08:44glad Intel fixed its performance per watt somewhat but what good is that benchmark when a 890m device gets better battery life (on WiFi and on full load), more performance, all with an equal size battery? this is why I never liked the shift to "performance per watt is so important" narrative spearheaded by Apple cultists and now everyone parrots it like it's the only benchmark to consider. if a comparable laptop can outmatch another in nearly every benchmark at a higher wattage AND still have better battery life when tested, isn't that ppw stat useless then? Looks like Ryzen AI APUs are a clear winner but props to Intel at least for bringing some competition in the iGPU and efficiency race.

Indeed, That's what you would deduce after reading the notebookcheck test... But i think its not the full story!

Performance benchmarks are run at vastly different power consumption, while power consumption test are done at iso performance, on some standardised/optimized profiles (e.g. video playback). It s nice videoplaback has been optimized now, but it is far from all the task you can do while on battery mode.

Now, do Both at the same time (e.g. I want to play a game single player while on battery mode).
From notebookcheck own  numbers, the picture would be vastly different. The Ryzen would have less than half the battery life as the Lunar Lake. Or you would compromise a bit and run at same performance as the lunar lake but still with a deficit in battery life, but not as large. Or if you want iso battery life, performance would be much worse.

Do everyone wants to play game (or do anything  a bit intensive) while unplugged all the time? Few people. But
it happens sometimes or often to others. That's for these people Lunar Lake is for.
That's what the current review is totally missing.

If your profile is to play games sitting on a chair and plugged in (which is the profile of many), and just have a lightweight laptop to travel with, then Lunar Lake is definitly not for you (Go see Rizen, Arrow Lake in this case...).

That's the thing, lunar lake is not for anyone, and look at the rest of the Intel processors yourself, I don't know yet what to do with a dying laptop with 13980hx

The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is the direct replacement of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U a 12 cores (2,8,2) cpu

But non of the devices you compare to has it...

Ok, seems like I'll be waiting for JustJosh or someone to get a better comparison for performance...

AMD shills will have hard time explaining why Lunar Lake is worse. Apple is still king though.

There is a problem with idle watts. ~6 watts idle with a 72 WH battery should not last beyond 12 hours on idle. somewhere the measurement is wrong.

F minus-forum
shitty little spammers

Quote from: sharath on September 24, 2024, 22:09:34There is a problem with idle watts. ~6 watts idle with a 72 WH battery should not last beyond 12 hours on idle. somewhere the measurement is wrong.

They measured it at full SDR brightness and 120 Hz (according to the article.)

Energy Efficiency (from JustJosh on YouTube)

Before Lunar Lake
1.  Apple M3
2.  AMD zen5 laptop hx365, hx370
3.  Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite
4.  Intel 155h or whatever

After Lunar Lake
1.  Apple M3
2.  AMD zen5 laptop
3.  Intel 268 or whatever
4.  Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite

Competition isn't putting much pressure on the leaders in the field ...

Bit confused with all the benchmarks and word salads.
It would suffice if you just said that intel was right to claim that its 17W Lunar Lake is just as good at gaming as AMD 890m at more than double the power. Therefore core ultra 9 (30W Lunar Lunar Lake) should be better at gaming (just like Intel claimed).

About performance per watt.
There is obvious discrepancy between real world battery life and calculated performance per watt with all cores at 100%. I don't see the point of a CPU that has better performance per watt and much worse battery life.
Maybe benchmark that measures battery drain on 100%-75%-50% load would be more representative test.
Because all other components contribute to battery drain.

Quote from: systemBuilder22 on September 25, 2024, 12:12:41Energy Efficiency (from JustJosh on YouTube)

Before Lunar Lake
1.  Apple M3
2.  AMD zen5 laptop hx365, hx370
3.  Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite
4.  Intel 155h or whatever

After Lunar Lake
1.  Apple M3
2.  AMD zen5 laptop
3.  Intel 268 or whatever
4.  Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite

Competition isn't putting much pressure on the leaders in the field ...

apple doesn't lead in all efficiency. it sometimes has higher idle power draw and also during some scenario loads. notebook shows, this when you look at some M-series variants vs the competition.

Here is what I like about this machine:
- battery life,
- single core performance,
- noise level.
I do not see any other positives and some "no go" negatives, including multicore performance and price tag. I wonder who should by this laptop? If you edit images or videos- multicore performance is not good enough for price tag. If you are running multiple VMs, you are short of cores. Gaming- cannot see any significant improvement. The biggest advantage of this laptop is that it can run everything, like eveyone windows laptop.
Speaking about review- not sure why there is not direct comparison between previous generation of Zenbook 14 and this machine, it is complete nonsense... I am wondering again, is it review or marketing... How it compers to vivobook s14 with AMD reviewed weeks ago?

Quote from: ab on September 26, 2024, 08:18:05How it compers to vivobook s14 with AMD

A valid question.
But if you notice, NB usually doesn't compare laptops from different model lines, assigning them to "different categories".

It is also interesting that Asus has really been blurring the lines between different laptop lines in recent years.
So e.g. ZenBook Pro used to be a top quality line. But it has not been so noticeable for a long time. And now the "coolest" universal laptop for comfortable work with graphics and leisure [not including games] remains the ROG Zephyrus M16, although it is already a gaming line [and even it was better than the designer ProArt]. And the VivoBook S comes out well from the cheap segment [although the quality of the materials, of course, is not yet the highest and the equipment often corresponds to the same HP/Dell alternatives].
That is why questions similar to yours may arise.

I will also remind you that you can independently add comparison graphs of the laptop models you need from different lines and brands.

I agree that it should be compared to Vivobook S 14. When I added it to the measurement graphs & tables, I've seen that it is usually much faster in everything, sometimes more than 2 times as fast. The drawback seems to be the power consumption, noise, and temperature under load. However, one can configure Vivobook S 14 to consume less power by selecting the right mode (like standard, eco, or quiet) and then it may still be faster than this, given that more power has diminishing returns and the margin is quite large. Interestingly Vivobook has a longer battery life for Wifi websurfing, but it also has a lower-resolution screen as well. Some Youtubers made power vs performance chart for different power levels of the CPUs, and the new Ryzen processor outperforms this Lunar Lake processor at the same power levels, but the Lunar Lake can consume less when idle. Given that the laptop won't be idle most of the time, the idle power consumption should be less important than the power consumption in light loads.

Quote from: Alexander_ on September 26, 2024, 09:09:11

Quote from: ab on September 26, 2024, 08:18:05How it compers to vivobook s14 with AMD

A valid question.
But if you notice, NB usually doesn't compare laptops from different model lines, assigning them to "different categories".

It is also interesting that Asus has really been blurring the lines between different laptop lines in recent years.
So e.g. ZenBook Pro used to be a top quality line. But it has not been so noticeable for a long time. And now the "coolest" universal laptop for comfortable work with graphics and leisure [not including games] remains the ROG Zephyrus M16, although it is already a gaming line [and even it was better than the designer ProArt]. And the VivoBook S comes out well from the cheap segment [although the quality of the materials, of course, is not yet the highest and the equipment often corresponds to the same HP/Dell alternatives].
That is why questions similar to yours may arise.

I will also remind you that you can independently add comparison graphs of the laptop models you need from different lines and brands.

Bottom firing speakers should be listed as a con. They may sound OK at the desk, but the sound gets muffled on the lap or anything else.

Quote from: Matt Schmidt on October 01, 2024, 10:29:22Bottom firing speakers should be listed as a con. They may sound OK at the desk, but the sound gets muffled on the lap or anything else.

Upward firing speakers should be listed as a con. They may sound OK at the lap, but the sound gets muffled on the desk when the laptop is closed and connected to external monitor or anything else.

Quote from: Schmatt midt on October 03, 2024, 01:52:37Upward firing speakers should be listed as a con. They may sound OK at the lap, but the sound gets muffled on the desk when the laptop is closed and connected to external monitor or anything else.

Absolutely! This is desktop computer and only someone insane would use it on their lap! What a crazy idea?!

Zen4 and especially Zen5 are in fact 1.4-1.5 times faster at 17W, proven by NB reviews on 7840U.
The processor performance in the CineBench R15 test in PL1 mode is at the level of a 5-year-old Zen2 (although it consumes about 2-2.5 times more).
Asus (Intel) has an epic failure in the memory controller - despite the fact that there is 8533, instead of 7500 in Zen5, the difference in average throughput is only 4 GB / s in favor of Intel.
I do not see any reduced noise level - 30 dB is too much by ear even at a ridiculous 17W. The maximum should not be higher than 25-26 dB.

The result is that Lunar Lake laptops are only suitable for housewives for simple tasks with such a low level of performance for 2024. Performance should be at least 2 times higher at 17W - 2100-2200 points in CineBenchR15. This is not a tablet, but also not a laptop by 2024 standards in terms of multi-threaded performance.

@N-B: This chip is aimed at laptops that are competing with M3 MacBook airs, not MacBook pros with M3 max. So for that performance profile, I think this level of CPU is acceptable.

I do hope that intel continue with this type of design and scale it up. Maybe in future build a bigger version of this chip with 12 CPUs cores + 24 Xe2 GPUs cores, on 2nm TSMC perhaps.

Vivobook S 14 AMD Strix HX 370 is better in every respect!

1. Better OLED screen with color coverage (Adobe 98% vs 89%)
2. Better performance (CB 3350 vs 1500)
3. Better battery life (16.5 hours web vs 14 hours)
4. Better price ($1200 vs $2000)
5. Better game FPS in real games (e.g. Cyberpunk, Witcher etc)