AMD Ryzen 7 4700U Geekbench score indicates a tough competition for the Intel Core i7-1065G7 and Core i7-10710U

[Redaktion]

An AMD Ryzen 7 4700U running on a Lenovo laptop has recently surfaced on Geekbench. The APU seems to have posted impressive single-core and multi-core scores finally giving the Intel Core i7-1065G7 and Core i7-10710U some good competition indicating the improvements brought forth by Zen 2 and the transition to 7nm.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Ryzen-7-4700U-Geekbench-score-indicates-a-tough-competition-for-the-Intel-Core-i7-1065G7-and-Core-i7-10710U.451199.0.html

[william blake]

fresh news :)

[k]

AMD which emerged so strongly in desktop and server is still struggling against intel in laptop. Now this is comparison against time as well. intel 10 gen is available and AMD 4xxx is still 3 months to go. Due to TMSC 7nm AMD is able to add more core in same wattage but in IPC (or may be combined with higherclock) is lagging. Not all software scale well with multithread and few of which does ask for license fee per core. now intel declared this year they will mature on 10nm and 7nm is not far away. MCM and infinity fabric alternative is not far away for intel with jim keller there. moreover intel 10nm is at par with 7nm of TSMC. intel is coming up with xe graphics. All these things makes one thing clear future is tough for AMD if not dark.

[dsakodsa]

I don't know how you reached to this conclusion but I think there is a clear difference between 10710u and 4700u. How you reached to the conclusion they are on par is beyond me. The scores are quite a bit higher for the 10710u and the ST score for Ice Lake is miles ahead, which btw, in a slim ultrabook, that is what matters.

[heffeque]

I don't know how you reached to this conclusion but I think there is a clear difference between 10710u and 4700u. How you reached to the conclusion they are on par is beyond me. The scores are quite a bit higher for the 10710u and the ST score for Ice Lake is miles ahead, which btw, in a slim ultrabook, that is what matters.

It's a 9% difference in single-core.
Who knows if AMD can make things better via drivers, but still not up to par on performance and power consumption on the laptop/ultrabook category until proven otherwise.
Who knows, maybe Zen 3 or Zen 4 will be AMD's ticket to ultrabooks.

[Mike C]

Uh, it's 15% slower than the Intel, core-for-core. Failing to see how this puts it on par unless you're running a HEAVILY threaded workload, as has been the case for AMD in general in recent years.

No, they haven't caught up yet for the vast majority of use cases.

[Vaidyanathan]

Like I mentioned, it all depends on how the laptop is made. If you look at the linked benchmark pages for Ice Lake and CML-U, you will find Geekbench ST scores that are lesser than what this Ryzen 4700U sample scored. Moreover, the cTDP in Renoir is configurable up to 28W, which should offer enough headroom for some nice tweaks.

[william blake]

all of you guys are dead wrong and here is why.
1. both intel cpus results are close to maximum score. 1st page from a hundred.
2. 4700u result is the only result and with single channel memory
3. 14nm comet lake is
a) less enery efficient than zen 2.
b) weak memory support, ddr4 2666 is far from ddr4 3200/lpddr 3733 in renoir or ice/tiger lake
c) in case you didnt know, intel 5ghz and 15w is a marketing lie. the real power is far beyond 15w(30 or even 50 can be measured), frequencies are below 4ghz. sometimes ~2ghz under sustained load.
4. 10nm ice/tiger are 4 cores. good luck to compete with 8 cores. something about 800 cinebench 15 multi vs 1200. good luck again. btw have you seen a single ice lake in a gaming or working machine?
5. renoir will come in a week. and it will be the best mobile cpu until the next, zen 3 cores, the next big jump. remember what happened in hedt, servers and desktops? amd before zen 2-a cheaper alternative, after zen 2-undisputed leader. same in laptops soon. the best efficiency, best or equal memory support, more cores, best or close igpu. forget about peak single core on the stretched tdp.

[Vaidyanathan]

all of you guys are dead wrong and here is why.
1. both intel cpus results are close to maximum score. 1st page from a hundred.
2. 4700u result is the only result and with single channel memory
3. 14nm comet lake is
a) less enery efficient than zen 2.
b) weak memory support, ddr4 2666 is far from ddr4 3200/lpddr 3733 in renoir or ice/tiger lake
c) in case you didnt know, intel 5ghz and 15w is a marketing lie. the real power is far beyond 15w(30 or even 50 can be measured), frequencies are below 4ghz. sometimes ~2ghz under sustained load.
4. 10nm ice/tiger are 4 cores. good luck to compete with 8 cores. something about 800 cinebench 15 multi vs 1200. good luck again. btw have you seen a single ice lake in a gaming or working machine?
5. renoir will come in a week. and it will be the best mobile cpu until the next, zen 3 cores, the next big jump. remember what happened in hedt, servers and desktops? amd before zen 2-a cheaper alternative, after zen 2-undisputed leader. same in laptops soon. the best efficiency, best or equal memory support, more cores, best or close igpu. forget about peak single core on the stretched tdp.

A benefit of this is that (assuming we get similar positive results from several notebook samples) ultrabooks can now be finally capable of doing some neat productivity on the move with just U-series chips.

[william blake]

A benefit of this is that (assuming we get similar positive results from several notebook samples) ultrabooks can now be finally capable of doing some neat productivity on the move with just U-series chips.

exactly what and why zen 2 will rule. energy efficiency of zen 2 is a huge jump forward. and laptops are all about it. and servers. 8 cores on 3+ghz in 15w is real and its the same performance as 6 core 4ghz desktop. prepare to ryzen 3600 in your ultrabooks.
positive results? they are everywhere. all leaks is about 6 desktop=8 laptop. we also know about simlar watt/ghz numbers from epyc and other low frequency zen 2 stuff.
the only reason renoir will not dominate the market-crappy market share. oems are not store shelves, amd should convince them to drop intel and place renoir instead.

[pro at cpu]

Intel die size wont do it forget about 5ghz it will never reach there in long duration. I bet the selling power of their laptop is marketing all of their laptop 5ghz. Why would they do this because higher number is better and when there is two cpu companies the market are split. Intel cannot take all and everything and one day they will lose it.

[Ed]

Isn't this comparison fairly pointless?

Using Intel Top Model's number and Compared to 4700U when it should be 4800U. Using Single Channels which will lower pretty much all results including CPU , Single, Multi and GPU benchmarks.

Then those Intel CPU's PL2 aren't even similar to AMD's PL2.

[william blake]

Isn't this comparison fairly pointless?

Using Intel Top Model's number and Compared to 4700U when it should be 4800U. Using Single Channels which will lower pretty much all results including CPU , Single, Multi and GPU benchmarks.

should be? they took the only renoir result available for geekbench.
ok, here is 4800u with dual channel versus peak(!) results from 1065g7 and 10710u
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/23316225
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/23909249
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/21896092
ice lake with the fastest memory possible, 3733
comet lake with fastest for him 2666, 4+ghz avg(be sure its not 15w)
renoir with 3200, all dual channels.

[deksman2]

should be? they took the only renoir result available for geekbench.
ok, here is 4800u with dual channel versus peak(!) results from 1065g7 and 10710u
.
.
.
ice lake with the fastest memory possible, 3733
comet lake with fastest for him 2666, 4+ghz avg(be sure its not 15w)
renoir with 3200, all dual channels.

If those results are actually accurate and not fake... then the 4800U is an excellent competitor for both those Intel chips.

It offers similar enough single threaded performance, coupled with better multithreaded performance in a 15W TDP with 8 cores/16 threads and more powerful graphics.

Given the efficiency of Zen 2 in general along with its availability (which is likely going it be sparse or close to non-existent for Intel due to their 10nm woes), AMD still (in all likelihood) has the advantage.

Also, the fact AMD was able to cram 8 cores and 16 threads into a 15W TDP (which can be configured up to 28W actually and these tests likely show only 15W limit) whereas Intel couldn't, and that it generally stays within its TDP limits while Intel tends to go WAY overboard, I don't think Intel has good competitor here.

And by the time Tiger Lake comes out, it will still have to deal with Zen 3.

Of course, I could be wrong, but we shall see.

[heffeque]

I'm all for AMD in desktop and server, but sadly 3X00U is way behind Intel in performance and especially in idle power consumption (see Surface Pro 7 Intel vs AMD comparison), and I highly doubt that in 4X00U both performance and idle consumption will have a huge huge huuuge bump to put it in front of Intel.

I hope I'm wrong.