This is how Intel beats AMD: Lenovo ThinkPad T14 Gen 6 laptop review

[Redaktion]

Intel Arrow Lake, AMD Krackan Point, Intel Lunar Lake - Lenovo has three different versions of the ThinkPad T14 Gen 6. We review one with Lunar Lake, and yet again, the platform shows why it is perfect for business laptops: Long battery life meets a low heat output and excellent system performance.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/This-is-how-Intel-beats-AMD-Lenovo-ThinkPad-T14-Gen-6-laptop-review.1144489.0.html

[Emilations]

I loved reading this review.
As a general feedback, is it possible to comment on whether or not certain models have a whistle or a high frequency whine from the fans at low rpm. Albeit fan noise volume is important, sometimes a low noise is intolerable if the pitch is too high.
Thank you

[davidm]

This exact review format is why I keep coming back to notebookcheck, even though it's so random otherwise.

It is amusing to add a Strix Halo based system, like the rog flow z13, to graphs. Look at Cinebench R15 Multi Loop, for example.

The PC industry is so slow to change.

[koppi33]

no OLED option with Lunar Lake

WHY?? How stupid is this!

[indyp]

Been on this site for years and I still have NO IDEA how you test performance. 

You don't list power profiles.
You don't list browser versions or driver versions.

Your "How we test/benchmark" page says you load latest drivers and software, but in the same page you say you expect manufacturers to provide up-to-date systems for review.  So which is it?  And then are you comparing a system in 2025 with a system you tested in 2023 with older drivers?

I'm confused because my old Acer 155H Ultra 7 (~$600) benches better than modern systems (like this one) on your web (Webxprt/Kraken) benches, sometimes ~20% better!  What power profile are you using for your benchmarks?

Makes it hard to actually compare my current system.  Makes it hard to trust your benchmarks are what they say they are.  Makes me think there's some inconsistencies in ALL your benchmarks because the documentation isn't there.

[Benjamin Herzig]

You don't list power profiles.

Yes we do. They are listed in the "Testing conditions" section.

Your "How we test/benchmark" page says you load latest drivers and software, but in the same page you say you expect manufacturers to provide up-to-date systems for review.  So which is it?

It is not an oxymoron: We test the system with the latest drivers provided by the manufacturer. So, we are using the most up to date drivers that the laptop manufacturer provides. We are not using generic drivers from AMD/Intel/Nvidia, even if they are newer.

I'm confused because my old Acer 155H Ultra 7 (~$600) benches better than modern systems (like this one) on your web (Webxprt/Kraken) benches, sometimes ~20% better!  What power profile are you using for your benchmarks?

H class CPU doing better than a U class chip, like Lunar Lake, is not that surprising.

All our benchmark testing is done in "Best performance" mode.

[spindelkryp]

>This is how Intel beats AMD

I mean does it, though? I think the way Intel "beats" AMD in case of ThinkPad is that for some mysterious reason Lenovo decided to ship only 1080p screen with the flagship Ryzen HX PRO processor. I would love Intel to succeed, more competition is better, but i think in this case it is mostly due to AMD version being artificially gimped.

[Nah]

Beats where? Not in power efficiency:
In gaming:
Core Ultra 7 258V: 96.1 pt (+18%)
8840U: 81.1 pt
Lets assume the 258V used its "TDP Turbo PL2    37 Watt" mode: This is 2.6 pt/Watt.
Lets assume the 8840U used 28 Watt: This is 2.9 pt/Watt, which makes the AMD APU more power efficient.

[Worgarthe]

Beats where? Not in power efficiency:
In gaming:
Core Ultra 7 258V: 96.1 pt (+18%)
8840U: 81.1 pt
Lets assume the 258V used its "TDP Turbo PL2    37 Watt" mode: This is 2.6 pt/Watt.
Lets assume the 8840U used 28 Watt: This is 2.9 pt/Watt, which makes the AMD APU more power efficient.

We don't have to assume though that you have no idea what PL2 is and that no CPU holds PL2 for a prolonged period, so your whole comparison is wrong from the start.

[not too shaby INTEL]

(Don't skip Notebookcheck's Lunar Lake power efficiency tests on the bottom of this post, luckily I found them and they partially redeem INTEL.)

It's not a secret that INTEL's node needs dire improvement (ask cloud server providers, where power efficiency matters and see how INTEL is lacking so far behind).

"The Intel Problem: CPU Efficiency & Power Consumption" (Gamers Nexus):
youtube.com/watch?v=9WRF2bDl-u8
In the vid, the INTEL CPU is roughly 3 times less power efficient, actually it's 3.67 = 3.3 [FPS per Watt]/0.9 [FPS per Watt].
The comments under the vid are also funny:

@ItsHaldun
1 year ago
"Ah yes, let me limit this 550$ CPU that I bought to 40% of its operating power, so it can get half the efficiency of its rival instead of 1/3rd"
- Greg, 2023

While the vid is comparing an AMD V-Cache CPU vs a non-V-Cache CPU, and since then INTEL has made improvements, AFAIK, INTEL has not caught up (catching up a 267% (=3.67x) difference, is not like it's a 30% one), otherwise INTEL's stock would have gone up and their stock went only recently up, after they have announced a deal with NVIDIA, maybe to save their company and/or give them time to release a new node, before things would get even worse.

Everyone would profit if INTEL would improve their node, especially if they would catch up and I hope they do.

The fact that INTEL even needs a second 37W power profile, while the AMD APU is up to 28W, tells us that INTEL still has node issues (and/or architectural issue). This is a difference of 32%, which is a full generation and one could say, that it's not a fair comparison, because AMD's APU only goes up to 28W.

Only Wh or Joules measured will answer this question.

notebookcheck.net/Intel-server-CPU-share-shrinks-to-62-AMD-still-trails-but-gap-narrows.1046758.0.html

After decades of near-total dominance, Intel is rapidly losing its grip on the server CPU market. AMD's EPYC processors are capturing an increasing share of revenue and enterprise trust, [..]
This trend appears unlikely to reverse in the near future.

There is an image with a graph and if the graph continues like that, AMD will overtake INTEL in a few more years.

The new AI server market really doesn't like high power consumption and will prefer power efficiency..

(I wanted to bring up another good point..maybe I'll remember it later)

CPU
notebookcheck.net/Intel-Lunar-Lake-CPU-analysis-The-Core-Ultra-7-258V-s-multi-core-performance-is-disappointing-but-its-everyday-efficiency-is-good.893405.0.html

The Core Ultra 7 258V's multi-core performance is disappointing

In multi-core AMD is 53% more power efficient, but in single-core INTEL is 6% better. Still, not bad for the single-core efficiency.

iGPU
notebookcheck.net/Intel-Lunar-Lake-iGPU-analysis-Arc-Graphics-140V-is-faster-and-more-efficient-than-Radeon-890M.894167.0.html

Arc Graphics 140V is faster and more efficient than Radeon 890M

Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 ultra Efficiency
INTEL leads with 67%