Is this a April Fools joke article? "demonstrate Intel's leads" ... !? You call 3% a "demonstrated lead" with what, 50% more energy consumption? And then AMD be like 20% ahead in multicore again with -30% energy consumption?

LOL

AMD clobbers Intel clock for clock, core for core.

8C vs 8C, never thought I'd see such a deficit from Intel.

And yet, there will be very few laptops with AMD chip inside this year.

someone knows why always x Lake? lake lake lake?

Intel is so wet? ok that they are having water from all sides, but change name!

Quote
nm notation is not actually comparable. Intel 10nm not equals TSMC 10nm!
The 2 companies budget is not comparable, still AMD improves like crazy from uarch to uarch

tsmc 7=intel 10. wiki says so

Yeah your right, their engineers back during skylake were amazing. Then they wanted to cut their budget and laid off tons of their veteran engineers, and look at them now. Saved a couple dollars but lost all of their greatest talent.

Quote from: 8&8 on April 03, 2020, 01:25:51
@A/Wblake are u serious? have u seen benchmarks? intel beats amd/TSMC node again with 100% of more space and lower frequency ram. AMD hw engineer aren't excellent! This is fact. I'm not a stupid fanboy,] i'm pro amd or intel [, we have to admit that again in their superefreshed 14nm fried/fish are still competitive with 7nm. maybe not with / EUV but my congratulations. When will we see 7nm of intel against 7+AMD we can speak about their performances. ALU's intel far better than amd.

iGPU always better than intel from 2012. not a surprise.

But again, it's a difference of design. Intel's processors don't benefit as much from higher clocked ram as AMD does. But arguing that is futile because the benchmarks speak for themselves, and AMD processors win in multicore benchmarks by a HUGE margin despite same amount of cores.

We all know that TSMC's 7nm is closer to Intel's 10nm. But we won't get to compare Intel's 7nm because by that point AMD will be on 5nm node.

iGPUs take space and power, so you can't pretend they don't play a role. And nowadays iGPUs performance is a lot better than before, enough to compete with low end dGPUs even.

@blake

why were gone to the rest skylake arch enginners?
they invest minds and money into AI in processors that you will see with a letter "N" that stays for Nirvana. If you search in this site u'll find some articles with processors of 2c/4t and they are good. Not a revolution but a decent evolution (leopard2A4 MBT) good first step.

NG = Nirvana&iGraphic


Sylicon Sylicon Sylicon.

@A/Wblake are u serious? have u seen benchmarks? intel beats amd/TSMC node again with 100% of more space and lower frequency ram. AMD hw engineer aren't excellent! This is fact. I'm not a stupid fanboy,] i'm pro amd or intel [, we have to admit that again in their superefreshed 14nm fried/fish are still competitive with 7nm. maybe not with / EUV but my congratulations. When will we see 7nm of intel against 7+AMD we can speak about their performances. ALU's intel far better than amd.

iGPU always better than intel from 2012. not a surprise.

Quote from: 8&8 on April 02, 2020, 18:02:45
@A remain however a good comparison because frequency of ram is lower than Ryzen. 14nm beats 7nm of amd.

i admit intel hw enginners are better than amd.

You are aware that intel only supports up to 2933mhz ram right? How is it AMD's fault Intel engineers couldn't figure out how to support faster ram?

The reality is, due to design AMD's processor benefit from faster ram much more than Intel processors.

And again, AMD has lower power usage and much faster iGPU.

To all those praising Intel for beating AMD 7nm with their 14 nm:
Intel 14 nm is even better than Intel 10 nm, so engineers were awesome a couple of years ago, and Intel still lives on that.
nm notation is not actually comparable. Intel 10nm not equals TSMC 10nm!
The 2 companies budget is not comparable, still AMD improves like crazy from uarch to uarch

Quote from: 8&8 on April 02, 2020, 18:02:45
@A remain however a good comparison because frequency of ram is lower than Ryzen. 14nm beats 7nm of amd.

i admit intel hw enginners are better than amd.

you mean skylake 2015 engineers? coz current engineers a total crap.

Did Intel write this for you?

Yeah, Intel just 'decided' to focus on single core performance this year.  LOL.

AMD caught up in single core and is kicking @ss in multi-core performance.   Everything has been re-written to take advantage of multi-core processors over the past decade.    It is almost pointless to even publish single core performance numbers these days.

@A remain however a good comparison because frequency of ram is lower than Ryzen. 14nm beats 7nm of amd.

i admit intel hw enginners are better than amd.

Quote from: k on April 02, 2020, 13:22:19
its better to look for bargain on 3xxx ryzen or 8xxx or 9xxx intel.

hmmm no, not this time. 2020 is the year for a new buy. id say 1,5x more performance per average laptop. never happened before.

Quote from: k on April 02, 2020, 13:22:19
rightly said by author not worth upgrade on 9th gen. both AMD and intel had let down. few percent, i would say even 50% improvement is not at all visible in real world for most of task. you are never going to run laptop for CFD simulations and hence as long as FPS is greater than 40 there is no need to burn money on costly CPU or GPU. its better to look for bargain on 3xxx ryzen or 8xxx or 9xxx intel.

I think you are one of the only people in the world who thinks Ryzen was a let down. Expecting 50% improvement in 1 generation is quite a large bar since most improvements tend to be within 10%.

That said, looking at previous 35W best Ryzen 3750H vs 4900HS, there is a 36.5% improvement in single core on cinebench and 139% improvement on multicore.

Geekbench also shows similar gains.

If you want to talk about real life improvements vs the 3750H, the improvements in real life usage are easily close to 50% or more:

static.techspot .com/articles-info/2003/bench/3.png