Framework Laptop 13.5 Ryzen 7 7840U review: So much better than the Intel version

[Redaktion]

The AMD Zen 4 U-series platform makes the Intel Core P-series look obsolete. Unless if you value one or two very specific Intel features, then the new AMD Framework should be a no-brainer for most users.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Framework-Laptop-13-5-Ryzen-7-7840U-review-So-much-better-than-the-Intel-version.756613.0.html

[davidm]

I gather they aren't quite there yet in terms of finish, but since they are an options platform, they really should offer a Trackpoint option, a lot of Thinkpad people would give them a second look.

[Jcack_66]

I stand by what was said in the verdict.
If you value multi-thread performance and graphics, then the AMD configuration is without a doubt the superior choice over Intel. The Ryzen 7 7840U and Radeon 780M are faster than any 13th gen Intel Core-U or Core-P processor especially when it comes to performance-per-watt and battery life. The fact that the Ryzen 7 and Core i7 configurations cost about the same at $1500 each only makes the AMD version more appealing.
It remains to be seen what's new about Minisforum's 2-in-1 Surface tablets will be launched in early 2024 with AMD Ryzen 8040U "Hawk Point" APUs published here on notebookcheck

[kek]

The only thing that I don't like is that temperatures are still as high as Intel.

I mean, what's the point of being "efficient" if the difference wont be that noticeable at the end?

Other than that, remains to be seen if drivers/BIOS will be stable enough or if AMD will pull another of their rare trick cards on this machine.

[Gustavo]

The only thing that I don't like is that temperatures are still as high as Intel.

I mean, what's the point of being "efficient" if the difference wont be that noticeable at the end?

The difference is noticeable! You get a lot better battery life as direct benefit, and a lot less fan noise under light loads. Temperature only really matters if it can degrade performance or harm the component. If the heat is within design, there is no reason to worry.

It's the same with all current chips, including Apple ones on fanless MacBooks that do not heat up your lap - it would heat up your lap if it tried to more aggressively extract the heat from the chip onto the environment, using the chassis as a big heatsink. You get a lower temp chip and a burnt thigh for no benefit to the chip itself.

[S]

You're reporting an idle power consumption of avg 6.5w. How does this yield 12 hours of battery life when 61Wh / 6.5w should give less than 10 hours?

[deb]

You're reporting an idle power consumption of avg 6.5w. How does this yield 12 hours of battery life when 61Wh / 6.5w should give less than 10 hours?

Wait yeah, what the hell. And the battery test was browsing the web too, not even idle

[Bizarro_NikoB]

I gather they aren't quite there yet in terms of finish, but since they are an options platform, they really should offer a Trackpoint option, a lot of Thinkpad people would give them a second look.

Absolutely agree! I value the trackpoint and dedicated buttons on Thinkpads and would consider a Framework if that was an option. Shame HP moved away from their iteration on Elitebooks.

[AlexZ]

I don't know how TF you test performance, but you list "Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Nano Gen 3 Intel Core i7-1360P" result for "7z b 4 -mmt1" as 5756 MIPS.  Well, I have X1 Nano Gen 3 with i5-1340P and I just ran "z7  b 4 -mmt1" and got 7879 MIPS.  How TF can you be so wrong?  All your performance test numbers are bogus.

[riklaunim]

You're reporting an idle power consumption of avg 6.5w. How does this yield 12 hours of battery life when 61Wh / 6.5w should give less than 10 hours?

If they measure power draw then it will not be equal to power consumption as there is a power supply in between and it has a limited efficiency. For example, if the laptop would be powered by a 1000W ATX power supply then the power supply could pull like 100W from the wall.

Battery life/power efficiency tests aren't the most repeatable and solid methodology out there and each outlet tends to do it differently.

[YUKI93]

I always value Thunderbolt connectivity, so I'll stick with the Intel version. I'm still waiting for the day where AMD can give proper Thunderbolt support to their CPUs.

[Hojjat]

I have an 11th gen Framework and a preorder for the AMD motherboard. I was worried it might have been a mistake, so I have been looking around for someone to compare the two. This actually helped a lot. The interactive graphs were absolutely helpful. Now I'm looking forward to my AMD mainboard!

[LifePo7]

The laptop is almost perfect, only the price is quite painful

[mananaysiempre]

I always value Thunderbolt connectivity, so I'll stick with the Intel version. I'm still waiting for the day where AMD can give proper Thunderbolt support to their CPUs.

The test suite you need to pass to be allowed to call yourself "Thunderbolt 4" (as opposed to the functionally identical "USB 4 with all optional features", like the AMD Framework's rear ports) is proprietary to Intel, and they seem to very disinclined to certify any chips but their own. So you're likely to be waiting a long time.

Shame about the uneven port functionality, though. That one's on AMD, because their mobile SoCs only support two USB 4 ports without (a lot of) additional circuitry.

[A]

So what are you guys using Thunderbolt 4 for? Not "I could use this and that" but what's plugged into your laptop's TB4 right now.