Quote from: Sammy0310 on October 21, 2020, 09:03:18
AMD Ryzen 4500/4700 CPU series are great, but on a thin chassis like my Lenovo T14s, they run extremely hot (markedly hotter than the equivalent Intel CPUs) which impacts performance from thermal throttling. That's why I'm returning the T14s. I can understand Dell avoiding those CPUs since the thermal issues on the even thinner XPS 13 chassis would be even worse, especially since the generally cooler Intel CPUs already have thermal issues in the XPS 13. So it's not only about power; thermals are a major consideration too!

The CPU running hot is extremely dependent on the cooling inside a laptop.
Most OEM's cut corners when it comes to cooling, and Dell is no exception.
In fact, DELL has been among the worst offenders when it came to cooling implementation (especially in regards to AMD hw).

What I hate about OEM's they assume that 1 cooling (Say for Intel) will do just as well for AMD... which is stupidly presumptuous because while both may have same TDP, how the hw achieves said performance is done differently.

Acer for example made Predator Helios 500 with Intel/NV and Ryzen 2700/Vega 56.

The Intel/NV version had thermal issues... but the Ryzen/Vega version did not (in fact, the all AMD Acer Predator 500 runs extremely cool and quiet even under maxed out load).
Why?
Because Acer redesigned the cooling specifically for AMD hw.

Most OEM's don't do this.

So, before you write off AMD Renoir and saying that Intel 'generally runs cooler'... you need to understand that Intel has had its cpu's running very hot and loud in laptops over the past several years... longer even.
I've seen countless posts from people on notebookreview and other forums (including youtube) posting ways to cool down Intel CPU's.

Renoir generally is more power efficiency, with superior battery life and better performance than Intel.
If a laptop runs hot and loud, blame it on the manufacturer cooling implementation first and foremost (however, Intel's CPU's had this issue before and it required of people to remove their Intel CPU's from the laptop, and remove the solder in some cases before repasting).

Quote from: Sammy0310 on October 21, 2020, 09:03:18
AMD Ryzen 4500/4700 CPU series are great, but on a thin chassis like my Lenovo T14s, they run extremely hot (markedly hotter than the equivalent Intel CPUs) which impacts performance from thermal throttling. That's why I'm returning the T14s. I can understand Dell avoiding those CPUs since the thermal issues on the even thinner XPS 13 chassis would be even worse, especially since the generally cooler Intel CPUs already have thermal issues in the XPS 13. So it's not only about power; thermals are a major consideration too!

Not only do the AMD 4000 U series chips run around the same temps as their Intel counterparts, battery life is longer and performance is generally better.

I've preferred Intel chips for decades over AMD.  Zen2 U,H, and X processors changed my preference based on specs and benchmarks. Data doesn't lie :)

Quote from: Sammy0310 on October 21, 2020, 09:03:18
I can understand Dell avoiding those CPUs since the thermal issues on the even thinner XPS 13 chassis would be even worse, especially since the generally cooler Intel CPUs already have thermal issues in the XPS 13. So it's not only about power; thermals are a major consideration too!

Do you mean power in terms of speed, or power in terms of power consumed? Because they're different things, and at the same level of power consumption (and thus heat output) Renoir was faster than Ice Lake and similar to Tiger Lake at the same TDP. In other words, you'd have the exact same heat issues with the same design of laptop if it had an Intel CPU in it. Objective tests on this site bear that out.

AMD Ryzen 4500/4700 CPU series are great, but on a thin chassis like my Lenovo T14s, they run extremely hot (markedly hotter than the equivalent Intel CPUs) which impacts performance from thermal throttling. That's why I'm returning the T14s. I can understand Dell avoiding those CPUs since the thermal issues on the even thinner XPS 13 chassis would be even worse, especially since the generally cooler Intel CPUs already have thermal issues in the XPS 13. So it's not only about power; thermals are a major consideration too!

Quote from: Rhi ma on October 20, 2020, 17:55:20
Let's talk facts please. Your only talking point is a geometric mean of tests. Lol. What the hell is that? Please do rigorous testing to tell me as an average consumer, who doesn't use cinebench type movie encoding why should I need Ryzen.

You don't need Ryzen. Then again, if you're an "average" consumer, you may not even need a laptop and may be fine with a Chromebook. Nobody knows what your use case is and what you "need." If you don't know, and don't care enough to take the short amount of time necessary to see the difference, then it probably doesn't matter which you get, as either will probably suffice. Of course, AMD is usually cheaper, which would be a reason for many people to prefer it, and the fact it's better than Intel in just about every way is simply an added bonus to the savings. NBC, and many other sites, do plenty of rigorous testing, and have been showing for months the differences between the two. Your comment makes it seem as though you read this one and only article and expected it to include every test and comparison ever done and didn't bother to look at anything else.

Let's talk facts please. Your only talking point is a geometric mean of tests. Lol. What the hell is that? Please do rigorous testing to tell me as an average consumer, who doesn't use cinebench type movie encoding why should I need Ryzen.

Just Josh also points that the XPS is limited to 15 W sustained, crippling CPU and GPU performance. Still temps were not looking good.

It doesn't mean TGL will perform 2x better (performances should be somehow linear up to 12 - 15 W and then go asymptotic)

Quote from: vertigo on October 20, 2020, 01:58:07

Quote from: kek on October 19, 2020, 23:32:02
Here comes AMD fanboys to say Intel is doomed when even AMD has not enough stock to take over the laptop market.

Also, XPS with AMD will probably never happen. Intel has XPS on that Evo program thing.

AFAIK, it's not an issue of stock, it's an issue of OEMs still putting out far, far more Intel laptops than AMD ones, and the AMD ones they do release are typically held back by crappy displays and other issues. The reason Intel is in trouble is because their just released, brand-new, supposed to be amazing chip is still only slightly better than AMD in graphics benchmarks while so far showing to actually be worse in actual gaming and definitely slower on the CPU side. Meanwhile, AMD is very close to revealing their new chip to compete with Tiger Lake, even though that doesn't seem necessary at this point, and, if it's even close to expectations, it will mean another year of AMD being a better performer, not to mention at a lower cost, than Intel, possibly at an even wider margin than this past year. The current situation is very similar to the Athlon 64 period years ago, which put Intel behind for several years. Any loss of market share is going to make it harder for them long-term, not to mention the loss of profits. They're far from doomed, but things aren't looking good for them.

Regardless, it's great because the increased competition is speeding up advancements and making things cheaper, so the consumers win. It's been far too long with Intel reigning supreme and offering overpriced products with minimal improvements from one generation to the next, because they didn't have to be competitive. And I'm not necessarily an AMD "fanboy" (a term that's used as much as an ad hominem attack in attempt to shut down people with differing opinions as it's used appropriately), I don't like Intel, as their success is largely thanks to a history of anticompetitive practices rather than actually providing a better product. That said, AMD isn't innocent in that regard, either, though they aren't as bad.

And since you're probably going to claim that I'm a fanboy, I'll just say that my last several computers--about half a dozen desktops I built myself and three laptops--have been Intel based, with my last use (for my own PCs) of AMD being the Athlon 64 X2. But with things the way they currently are, I'd buy a laptop with Renoir over one even with Tiger Lake, all else being equal, even the price. Hell, I'd probably pay more for AMD than Intel, not because I'm pro-AMD or anti-Intel, but because AMD is just better, period. So before you use the word fanboy, maybe consider that.

I've been needing a laptop for months, I would say a year. Disappointed by comet lake and ice lake, ended up buying the latest tiger lake laptop. I searched for months for a ryzen laptop, but it was near impossible to get and the ones that were available, the specs were not up to what I needed (mainly all with 8GB of ram no expandable, or screen being total crap). At least thanks to ryzen I managed to get an intel equivalent for similar price.

Corporate Renoir laptop? Look at the soon-to-be-available 13/14/15" HP Elitebook 835/845/855 G7 with up to a Ryzen 7 Pro 4750U CPU, 8C/16T.

We need choice. And currently we have none. You can have any processor in a laptop you want as long as it's Intel. I am in a market for a new corporate laptop and I have the option to choose freely. Ryzen 4000 came out and I wanted one in my next laptop so I was waiting from the beginning of the year. But most likely I will have to get the XPS 9500 (I am currently working with the XPS 9530 from 2014).
These king of articles are important since they put pressure on manufacturers. One can call them fan-boyish but we simply do not have any other means to make our point. I personally cannot buy a Ryzen laptop with a subpar screen/battery life/design just to stick it to Intel/OEMs.
The more these articles there are the better. This will make the prices go down and maybe will incentivize manufacturers to make high-end AMD laptops since objectively AMD is the better choice at the moment.

I've been waiting to buy this but Dell still doesn't sell it, I want high end laptop with AMD, when will you wake up Dell? No im not just going to compromise, I want the best and today that's AMD.

Because Intel is not good enough.
Because 4500U is better than i7 12XXG7.
Because 4600U @ 25W is already better than 10750H.
Because Zen will be even better, Zen 3 is a technological marvel with those cache, IPC gains and amount of cores on one CCX.
Because people are feed up with Intel misleading marketing with crippled 2x PCEe lanes Thunderbolt and unreachable and unsustainable max CPU frequency.

Quote from: kek on October 19, 2020, 23:32:02
Here comes AMD fanboys to say Intel is doomed when even AMD has not enough stock to take over the laptop market.

Also, XPS with AMD will probably never happen. Intel has XPS on that Evo program thing.

AFAIK, it's not an issue of stock, it's an issue of OEMs still putting out far, far more Intel laptops than AMD ones, and the AMD ones they do release are typically held back by crappy displays and other issues. The reason Intel is in trouble is because their just released, brand-new, supposed to be amazing chip is still only slightly better than AMD in graphics benchmarks while so far showing to actually be worse in actual gaming and definitely slower on the CPU side. Meanwhile, AMD is very close to revealing their new chip to compete with Tiger Lake, even though that doesn't seem necessary at this point, and, if it's even close to expectations, it will mean another year of AMD being a better performer, not to mention at a lower cost, than Intel, possibly at an even wider margin than this past year. The current situation is very similar to the Athlon 64 period years ago, which put Intel behind for several years. Any loss of market share is going to make it harder for them long-term, not to mention the loss of profits. They're far from doomed, but things aren't looking good for them.

Regardless, it's great because the increased competition is speeding up advancements and making things cheaper, so the consumers win. It's been far too long with Intel reigning supreme and offering overpriced products with minimal improvements from one generation to the next, because they didn't have to be competitive. And I'm not necessarily an AMD "fanboy" (a term that's used as much as an ad hominem attack in attempt to shut down people with differing opinions as it's used appropriately), I don't like Intel, as their success is largely thanks to a history of anticompetitive practices rather than actually providing a better product. That said, AMD isn't innocent in that regard, either, though they aren't as bad.

And since you're probably going to claim that I'm a fanboy, I'll just say that my last several computers--about half a dozen desktops I built myself and three laptops--have been Intel based, with my last use (for my own PCs) of AMD being the Athlon 64 X2. But with things the way they currently are, I'd buy a laptop with Renoir over one even with Tiger Lake, all else being equal, even the price. Hell, I'd probably pay more for AMD than Intel, not because I'm pro-AMD or anti-Intel, but because AMD is just better, period. So before you use the word fanboy, maybe consider that.

Here comes AMD fanboys to say Intel is doomed when even AMD has not enough stock to take over the laptop market.

Also, XPS with AMD will probably never happen. Intel has XPS on that Evo program thing.

There is a follow-up to that phoronix article...