The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H's CPU and iGPU performance has leaked and it appears that the CPU will bring a noticeable efficiency advantage over the Raptor Lake chips. Additionally, the chip also features a much more powerful Xe-LPG iGPU than previously rumored, as it reportedly beats the AMD Radeon 780M.https://www.notebookcheck.net/New-Core-Ultra-7-155H-leak-shows-Xe-LPG-iGPU-handily-beating-Radeon-780M-alongside-noticeable-CPU-efficiency-bump.781867.0.html
i got 3300 @ 3dmark time spy with my 7840U and 780M. 30W tdp.
no ocking just setting a fixed igpu frequency. 7500 MT DDR5
This is pure fraud and juggling with numbers. No one is interested in how much cpu and igpu consume separately, everyone is interested in how much they consume together. But instead they consume 41+38W ~ 80W? So the 7940HS consumes much less! And still 1.5 times faster!
And where is the -40% efficiency per 1W between "10nm"++++++++ and "7nm" from Intel? Yes, this is a complete failure if the performance is the same, but only -9% (45W vs 41W)...
Did customers expect such a disgrace from Intel? They expected the minimum energy efficiency of the 7940HS to be 54W in total, but here it turns out to be a 1.5-fold loss in CPU performance alone!
I don't trust Intel. They manipulate data.
Quote from: NikoB on December 11, 2023, 19:55:37This is pure fraud and juggling with numbers. No one is interested in how much cpu and igpu consume separately, everyone is interested in how much they consume together. But instead they consume 41+38W ~ 80W? So the 7940HS consumes much less! And still 1.5 times faster!
And where is the -40% efficiency per 1W between "10nm"++++++++ and "7nm" from Intel? Yes, this is a complete failure if the performance is the same, but only -9% (45W vs 41W)...
Did customers expect such a disgrace from Intel? They expected the minimum energy efficiency of the 7940HS to be 54W in total, but here it turns out to be a 1.5-fold loss in CPU performance alone!
Erase quickly while there's still time...
How does this show the Ultra 7 155H in better light and go against MLID in terms of CPU performance? His graph showed improved efficiency of MTL/Intel 4 at <50 W TDP (boost power unknown) by 10-15% in CB R23 and this shows the roughly same score at 9% less power? Isn't that worse?
Quote from: NikoB on December 11, 2023, 19:55:37This is pure fraud and juggling with numbers. No one is interested in how much cpu and igpu consume separately, everyone is interested in how much they consume together. But instead they consume 41+38W ~ 80W? So the 7940HS consumes much less! And still 1.5 times faster!
And where is the -40% efficiency per 1W between "10nm"++++++++ and "7nm" from Intel? Yes, this is a complete failure if the performance is the same, but only -9% (45W vs 41W)...
Did customers expect such a disgrace from Intel? They expected the minimum energy efficiency of the 7940HS to be 54W in total, but here it turns out to be a 1.5-fold loss in CPU performance alone!
how do you always end up writing the most objectively wrong and cringe comments on here every time? lol give it up