Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 10:25:50Can you name one example of such laptop?

Thinkbook 13s gen4 with the 6800U in the US is around $850. Prices outside the NA is a different story.

Quote from: Liviu993 on May 11, 2022, 00:33:32
Just look at the new Razer Blade 15 with Intel 12800h and a 80Wh battery witch lasted only 4h:53min in websurfing test, while the new Razer Blade 14 with AMD 6900HX and 62Wh battery lasted 9h:31m in the same test (both on notebookcheck reviews)
...
You can't compare the intel old 10nm tehnology with 6nm in terms of efficiency.

It's true that Alder Lake seems to post rather bad endurance results. Who knows whether it's a hardware issue or it's BIOS/ firmware and therefore fixable. But look at the Alienware x14. It managed 9 hours. Granted, it has 80 Wh battery. But still, a lot better than others. Either Intel screwed up or the added complexity of a heterogenous architecture is causing issues that will need ironing out.

I recall years ago Dell XPS 13 managing 11 hours and XPS 15 more than 15 hours in the Wi-Fi tests. I think it was around 2017, Kaby and Coffee Lake. Those were impressive results. And coming from 14 nm processors. The key was avoiding higher resolution displays, those were battery killers. This test is quite sensitive to BIOS/ firmware/ drivers/ software. You're dealing with such tiny power budget that even small differences have significant impact. Let's say you've got 90 Wh battery. You've got only 6 W budget if you want to manage 15 hours. 6 W for the entire laptop, including screen and everything. Something happens that causes it to draw 6.5 W and you lose 70 minutes of runtime. 70 minutes for 500 mW. It can be a matter of luck - which screen, SSD, Wi-Fi module, etc. you get. Those can make a lot bigger difference than 500 mW.

As for your last sentence, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Or do you care to tell me to which feature those 6 nm of yours pertain to and what is the corresponding dimension on Intel's current process?

This is a false statement. Ryzen laptops last the same in terms of battery life as their Intel counterparts. Even NotebookCheck has ran reviews on the Thinkpad T14/T14s to show they both end up having similar run times, and nothing close to the "2x" you are claiming.
[/quote]
Are you in late with the news ? even from ryzen 4xxx AMD crushed Intel in terms of power efficiency, maybe in case of thinkpad they cannibalised the AMD version to make them more even. Just look at the new Razer Blade 15 with Intel 12800h and a 80Wh battery witch lasted only 4h:53min in websurfing test, while the new Razer Blade 14 with AMD 6900HX and 62Wh battery lasted 9h:31m in the same test (both on notebookcheck reviews), if you do the math that's over 2x in power efficiency, but even in last generation the gap was so big, I had a Lenovo legion 5 with i5 11400h and with iGPU and power save settings i coudn't get even 4 hours on battery, now I have an Asus strix g15 advantage with AMD 5900hx and i get over 9 hours of battery with ease, that is crazy for a gaming laptop.
You can't compare the intel old 10nm tehnology with 6nm in terms of efficiency.

Quote from: Tomatot on May 10, 2022, 10:33:49

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 10:25:50

Quote from: Tomatot on May 10, 2022, 10:08:02

I'm pretty sure 6800u laptops will start from 1000-1200USD. Also, what you don't take into consideration is the massive battery life improvements compared to a dGPU.

Can you name one example of such laptop?

Also, these are plugged-in benchmarks. If we're talking on-battery performance, what makes you think the 680M will be more power efficient or better performing than say, MX570 Max-Q? Where are you getting this assumption from?

Regarding price... Same story. Lots of laptops with 5800u are available at around 800-900 €.

I love how they just go "See, Lenovo paper launched 4 laptops at those price ranges" and they never mention they are most likely business machines with shitty screens, small batteries, low stock supply or a combination of all those.

And outside of business machines, it's even funnier: soldered ram, cheap builds or models that are quite difficult to find in certain regions.

Quote from: Liviu993 on May 10, 2022, 14:34:16

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 11:30:19
Because of chip shortage.

HP Pavilion Aero 13 got updated to Ryzen 5825U "Barcelo", as did most 2022 Ryzen ultrabooks that were priced under $1500 in 2021.

We won't know about the power efficiency of 680M until it comes out.

Looking at Valve Steam Deck's 2 hour runtime running 720p games, it is not looking too good. I would not be surprised if 680M is actually less efficient than MX570 at full power.

We're not at that stage yet where you can use GPU for hours on end without worrying about battery life. Even MacBook M1 Pro isn't there.

Steam deck has only 40wh battery, if we can get 3+ hours of gaming on a laptop on battery with this new SOC, it will be amazing, and the battery life will be a lot better on light use, even the ryzen 5xxx laptops have way better battery life, in some cases even 2x compared to an intel based laptop with same battery capacity. This soc is better for slim and portable laptops with all day battery life that can also do some gaming, and it think it has no competition in this sector on windows.

This is a false statement. Ryzen laptops last the same in terms of battery life as their Intel counterparts. Even NotebookCheck has ran reviews on the Thinkpad T14/T14s to show they both end up having similar run times, and nothing close to the "2x" you are claiming.

Quote from: Liviu993 on May 10, 2022, 14:34:16
Steam deck has only 40wh battery, if we can get 3+ hours of gaming on a laptop on battery with this new SOC, it will be amazing, and the battery life will be a lot better on light use, even the ryzen 5xxx laptops have way better battery life, in some cases even 2x compared to an intel based laptop with same battery capacity. This soc is better for slim and portable laptops with all day battery life that can also do some gaming, and it think it has no competition in this sector on windows.

Remember, the Steam Deck also has a far more efficient 7-9 Watt CPU and 720p display. Yet it still only managed 3 hours on the most low-power hardware you can imagine that was optimized at each component level to deliver the best possible battery life.

Now even if the 28 Watt APU (6800U + 680M) was somehow optimized with "low-resolution display + big battery + low-power SSD + most efficient LPDDR5 memory + factory drivers & power tuning" setup, it is for sure going to do worse than 3 hours at full GPU power.

Unless it was a 15" with 100Wh battery, but no OEM is going to waste the most expensive U-series chip on earth on such chassis.

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 11:30:19
We're not at that stage yet where you can use GPU for hours on end without worrying about battery life. Even MacBook M1 Pro isn't there.

Really, the only way to get there is to have so ridiculously powerful hardware that using just a fraction of its potential gives you satisfactory results. Unfortunately, game developers will always find a way to squander... I mean use whatever you give them. The only alternative I can think of is a massive breakthrough in energy storage.

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 11:30:19
Because of chip shortage.

HP Pavilion Aero 13 got updated to Ryzen 5825U "Barcelo", as did most 2022 Ryzen ultrabooks that were priced under $1500 in 2021.

We won't know about the power efficiency of 680M until it comes out.

Looking at Valve Steam Deck's 2 hour runtime running 720p games, it is not looking too good. I would not be surprised if 680M is actually less efficient than MX570 at full power.

We're not at that stage yet where you can use GPU for hours on end without worrying about battery life. Even MacBook M1 Pro isn't there.

Steam deck has only 40wh battery, if we can get 3+ hours of gaming on a laptop on battery with this new SOC, it will be amazing, and the battery life will be a lot better on light use, even the ryzen 5xxx laptops have way better battery life, in some cases even 2x compared to an intel based laptop with same battery capacity. This soc is better for slim and portable laptops with all day battery life that can also do some gaming, and it think it has no competition in this sector on windows.

Because of chip shortage.

HP Pavilion Aero 13 got updated to Ryzen 5825U "Barcelo", as did most 2022 Ryzen ultrabooks that were priced under $1500 in 2021. Bulk of already limited AMD's Zen 3+ stock is being directed to whatever popular gaming laptops with 6000H CPU these OEMs can afford to source. And even those are being heavily delayed due to status quo of China's manufacturing chains.
So naturally, the 6800U is a huge luxury and is overpriced as a result.

We won't know about the power efficiency of 680M until it comes out.
Looking at Valve Steam Deck's 2-3 hour runtime running 720p games however, it is not looking too good. I would not be surprised if 680M is actually less efficient than MX570 at full power.

We're not at that stage yet where you can use GPU for hours on end without worrying about battery life. Even MacBook M1 Pro isn't there.

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 10:57:31

Quote from: Tomatot on May 10, 2022, 10:37:19
In general, laptops with a MX450 or simialr have way worse battery life than laptops with only an iGPU.

dGPU ultrabooks have Nvidia Optimus so battery life is equal to laptops with only an iGPU.

The Lenovo Yoga 7 14 starts at 1300 EUR which is 1400 USD, and that's for 6600U/8GB base model.

As for 1000-1200 USD 6800U laptop, I'll believe it when I see it.

Regarding price, maybe I'm a bit too optimistic and maybe AMD has increase their prices. Wait & see I guess. My assumption was based on the fact we can find devices with 5800u at around 700€ ATM: hp-pavilion-aero-13-133-amd-ryzen-7-16-gb-ram-512-gb-ssd-moins-de-1kg (709 €)

So I don't see why prices would have doubled with this new generation.

If Optimus perfectly works, then it's similar battery life in light usage, but as soon as the dGPU is needed, it will use way more battery life than the iGPU, so in the end battery life will be better with the 680M.

Quote from: Tomatot on May 10, 2022, 10:37:19
In general, laptops with a MX450 or simialr have way worse battery life than laptops with only an iGPU.

dGPU ultrabooks have Nvidia Optimus so battery life is equal to laptops with only an iGPU for light use (browsing, office work, video streaming, etc)

The Lenovo Yoga 7 14 starts at 1300 EUR which is 1400 USD, and that's for 6600U/8GB base model. SKU with 6800U/16GB/+premium features will be well over 1800 USD, and that's not even taking storage upgrades into account.

Also,

Lenovo announced 18 hours of battery life with the new Yoga 7

Asus, 19 hours with the new Zenbook S 13 OLED

It's way higher than what they usually announce.

In general, laptops with a MX450 or simialr have way worse battery life than laptops with only an iGPU.

I just think the 6800 is a wonderful package, and I say that after ordering a laptop with a 1240p (simply because I can't wait forever).

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 10:25:50

Quote from: Tomatot on May 10, 2022, 10:08:02

I'm pretty sure 6800u laptops will start from 1000-1200USD. Also, what you don't take into consideration is the massive battery life improvements compared to a dGPU.

Can you name one example of such laptop?

Also, these are plugged-in benchmarks. If we're talking on-battery performance, what makes you think the 680M will be more power efficient or better performing than say, MX570 Max-Q? Where are you getting this assumption from?

Simply from history. Since forever iGPU have been very savy compared to dGPU, and that's why most manufacturers use both and why most laptops use the iGPU when the dGPU is not necessary.

Regarding price... Same story. Lots of laptops with 5800u are available at around 800-900 €.

Regarding announcements, just look at the Yoga 7 with 6800u. It has very high end specs and yet it's going to be sold at 1300 euros. With sales you can assume it will be cheaper. But it has DDR5, premium design, fairly high resolution. So I don't see why we couldn't have cheaper options with less high-end features.

Quote from: Tomatot on May 10, 2022, 10:08:02

I'm pretty sure 6800u laptops will start from 1000-1200USD. Also, what you don't take into consideration is the massive battery life improvements compared to a dGPU.

Can you name one example of such laptop?

Also, these are plugged-in benchmarks. If we're talking on-battery performance, what makes you think the 680M will be more power efficient or better performing than say, MX570 Max-Q? Where are you getting this assumption from?

Quote from: Lorry on May 10, 2022, 10:01:05
A pointless comparison because

1. Nobody buys a R9-6900H + 3080 high-performance laptop to use the iGPU.

2.  R7-6800U (Radeon 680M) ultrabooks cost >1500 USD, at which point you might as well buy a 1000 USD 13-14" 3050Ti ultrabook.

3.  i7-1255U (XE 96) ultrabook starts at 600 USD because it can be used in low-end models unlike 6800U which is exclusive to certain lineups. Multiple price range and easy availability are the biggest advantages of XE graphics over 680M.

4.  Upcoming Nvidia MX570 graphics will equal or outperform 680M in most professional apps for a fraction of the price.

I'm pretty sure 6800u laptops will start from 1000-1200USD. Also, what you don't take into consideration is the massive battery life improvements compared to a dGPU.

A pointless comparison because

1.  Nobody buys a R9-6900H + 3080 high-performance laptop to use the iGPU.

2.  R7-6800U (Radeon 680M) ultrabooks cost >1500 USD, at which point you might as well buy a 1000 USD 13-14" 3050Ti ultrabook.

3.  Whereas, i7-1255U (XE 96) ultrabooks start at 600 USD, so it can be go into affordable low-end lineups e.g. HP Pavilion, Lenovo Ideapad 3/5, Acer Aspire, Asus VivoBook, etc.
Unlike the supply limited 6800U which is exclusive to only certain extremely high-end lineups.

So multiple price range and easy availability are the biggest advantages of Intel XE graphics over AMD 680M.

4.  Upcoming Nvidia MX570 graphics will equal or outperform 680M in most professional apps for a fraction of the price.

This is why I don't understand all this "reviewer" hype around RDNA2 mobile graphics. The tech itself is great, but price point is a complete miss.