[HN Gopher] AMD Launches Ryzen 5000 Mobile: Zen 3 and Cezanne fo...
___________________________________________________________________
AMD Launches Ryzen 5000 Mobile: Zen 3 and Cezanne for Notebooks
Author : adwn
Score : 180 points
Date : 2021-01-15 12:49 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.anandtech.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.anandtech.com)
| po1nter wrote:
| I wonder how they will tackle the availability issue since on the
| desktop side, it's close to impossible to get a 5900x/5950x CPU
| at MSRP or close to MSRP price.
| bevenky wrote:
| Would it be fair to compare these with M1s and if yes how would
| they compare side by side?
| 6d65 wrote:
| Geekbench
|
| M1 single threaded ~= 1720
|
| M1 multi threaded ~= 7400
|
| Ryzen 5900h single threaded = 1520
|
| Ryzen 5900h multithreaded = 9325
|
| Ryzen is consuming 45W, M1 is said to consume 13. Ryzen is on
| TSMC 7nm, M1 on 5nm. It's said that TSMCs 5nm is 1.8x more
| dense than 7nm, 30% more efficient and 15% faster.
|
| So if both were on 5nm, one could extrapolate that the single
| threaded performance would be similar, but ryzen would still
| lose on battery life. But it's a speculation.
|
| As to whether it's fair, Apple can pay premium for 5nm
| exclusive access, and then charge the users hundreds of dollars
| per 8GB of RAM or storage upgrades.
|
| AMD is selling the chips to the OEMs which have to make money
| themselves, which means that using cutting edge nodes might not
| make sense economically.
|
| But that doesn't matter, both are businesses, it's AMDs fault
| that they didn't rush to 5nm and are comfortable at staying
| behind.
|
| The ones to lose will be the premium laptop manufactures, that
| sell laptops at 1000+ usd. As the agressive Apple marketing
| will most likely cut into their sales.
|
| It would be interesting to see if the rumors, about Intel using
| TSMC 5nm this year, are true. Intel had the single threaded
| perf lead, even on their less dense 14nm node, vs AMD on TSMCs
| 7nm. Could be that on TSMCs nodes they would be faster than
| both Apple and AMD, but still probably at a higher TDP than
| Apple chips.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| M1 under multicore loads hits north of 20W:
| https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-
| apple-m1-teste...
| [deleted]
| fvv wrote:
| Better compare to 5800u if u want lower power comparison
| chrismorgan wrote:
| I have three requirements that I would like to satisfy in a new
| laptop:
|
| 1. AMD Ryzen, Zen 2 or later (meaning 3000 desktop, 4000 mobile
| or 5000 any). At this point assume that I'm not concerned about
| class of processor, though I think H-class is probably my ideal.
|
| 2. Minimum screen resolution of 2560x1440, preferably 4K or
| similar. (And since I'm talking, ideally a squarer aspect ratio
| like 3:2, but those are so rare I won't even bother looking. But
| I do really like my Surface Book's 3000x2000 display.)
|
| 3. No NVIDIA GPU, because I want to use Linux and NVIDIA hates
| Linux, and I want to be able to run Wayland also. So either
| integrated graphics only (with a U-class or H-class APU), or an
| AMD dGPU (which would be the only option on the higher-end
| desktop CPUs). Sure, with U-class or H-class I could just disable
| the NVIDIA GPU, but the dead weight and giving money to NVIDIA
| for something I will never use galls, quite apart from the mild
| nuisance of figuring out how to disable it.
|
| I looked through all the manufacturers I could find in Australia,
| and all the Clevo OEMs I could find worldwide.
|
| I have not found a single device that satisfies all three of
| these requirements. Any two, sure, but not all three.
|
| A related peeve lies with the H-class APUs: why can't I get one
| without an NVIDIA GPU? I have found only one place selling
| laptops with H-class APUs and no dedicated NVIDIA GPU: TUXEDO, in
| their Pulse 14 and Pulse 15. But even then, they're only
| available on paper--order now and you won't get it for over three
| months since they're currently out of both 4600H and 4800H APUs.
| (For myself, I rule TUXEDO out for not shipping to Australia,
| anyway; any forwarding service arrangement would be a bother and
| probably expensive, and leave me with a useless warranty.) But
| you'd think that more than one manufacturer would look at how
| light yet powerful a laptop they can make this way and do one
| without a discrete GPU. Look, the Pulse 15 with its 91Wh battery
| even advertises _over 20 hours_ of battery life when idling at
| minimum brightness (and the Pulse 14's 47Wh battery, 12 hours).
|
| These things make me sad. I hope the portfolio expansion
| mentioned here will include something to satisfy me.
| Triv888 wrote:
| I like https://www.asus.com/us/Mini-PCs/Mini-PC-PN50/ but I use
| hotel TVs for my screen (so resolution varies...)
| mattnewton wrote:
| > No NVIDIA GPU, because I want to use Linux and NVIDIA hates
| Linux
|
| Is this a voting-with-your-wallet position for open drivers /
| better Linux support, or have you experienced issues in the
| past with the proprietary drivers?
|
| I ask because Linux with an Nvidia gpu is my daily driver
| (desktop), and I'm likely to build another system like that
| again, was just curious what I don't know.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| A bit of both, really.
|
| I've never tried to run Linux on a machine with an NVIDIA
| GPU, or on a machine with two GPUs. But from what I have
| read, this is the _impression_ that I get:
|
| It's quite common to have a bit of trouble getting _anything_
| working, and you will run into problems far more often than
| with any other brand of GPU (which will just work perfectly).
|
| Many things won't work with the proprietary drivers, because
| they implement everything their own way, and so software has
| to be written against the NVIDIA proprietary drivers, rather
| than using the standard tools that everything else uses like
| OpenGL and Mesa.
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/04/linux-on-laptops-
| asu... is the sort of thing I've heard of: there, the NVIDIA
| GPU is trouble from start to end. Admittedly it might have
| gone more smoothly with something other than Ubuntu, with
| more recent versions of kernels and other such stuff (I like
| Arch, so this wouldn't be a problem for me), but it's still
| just bad.
|
| But then too, I mentioned Wayland: because of how NVIDIA made
| their own world on Linux, the proprietary drivers are
| completely incompatible with Wayland--basically NVIDIA
| hardcoded support for X (again, rather than using the
| standard approach everyone else settled on) and haven't done
| so for Wayland.
|
| If you use Nouveau instead of the proprietary drivers, you're
| left with a GPU missing a substantial fraction of its
| functionality, stuck at a low clock speed in power-draining
| mode. But I think you _might_ be able to use Wayland.
|
| I gather that Linux has problems in any dual GPU environment,
| but that the issues are far worse with NVIDIA than with
| anything else. If you're operating a single-GPU machine and
| are content to use the proprietary drivers, I gather it's not
| _such_ a problem, though many applications may be unable to
| use GPU acceleration.
|
| I welcome any corrections to what I've written here. As I
| say, this is all just hearsay.
| deckard1 wrote:
| If you're trying to do anything with the latest hardware,
| it's always going to be a pain on Linux. Even Windows
| doesn't have flawless support with every game on day one.
|
| > It's quite common to have a bit of trouble getting
| anything working, and you will run into problems far more
| often than with any other brand of GPU (which will just
| work perfectly).
|
| That's a joke. I've been using Linux on Nvidia since the
| Riva TNT. It was _always_ Radeon that had garbage drivers
| and really didn 't give two shits about Linux. Not sure how
| much this has changed with AMD owning them, but I never
| bothered to look at Radeon since Nvidia was always the best
| card and always worked. It's almost never more than just
| doing a single package install.
|
| > software has to be written against the NVIDIA proprietary
| drivers, rather than using the standard tools that
| everything else uses like OpenGL and Mesa.
|
| I think you fundamentally do not understand Mesa or OpenGL
| to say this. And no, nothing has to be "written against"
| Nvidia. It's literally OpenGL (or Vulkan, today). Unless
| you're talking CUDA or something, which I don't touch.
|
| This all just sounds like so much FUD that you wrote.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| I certainly don't understand all that I'm writing of--
| it's based purely on what I've read, which has mostly
| been casual rather than deliberate research. It's almost
| certain that I've made errors.
|
| I'm referring to things like the Background section of
| https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/Wayland/NVIDIA:
|
| > _The proprietary NVIDIA doesn 't provide the same user
| space API as the open source drivers. While the open
| source drivers allows the display server to use the
| Generic Buffer Manager (gbm) and Kernel Mode Setting
| (KMS) APIs to manage hardware buffers, set modes, and
| queue page flips, configure hardware planes, the NVIDIA
| driver forces the display server to treat it differently.
| Instead of these APIs, the compositor uses a combination
| of KMS, to set modes, and EGL (EGLDevice & EGLStream
| extensions to be precise) to indirectly queue page flips
| by linking an EGLSurface, corresponding to an area of the
| screen, with a CRTC of an EGLDevice, using an EGLStream._
|
| My OpenGL and Mesa remarks are very probably wrong.
|
| The impression that I have received is that the window
| manager is probably the main thing that needs to be aware
| of these differences and NVIDIA ignoring the standards
| (this is why Sway doesn't support NVIDIA's proprietary
| drivers: https://drewdevault.com/2017/10/26/Fuck-you-
| nvidia.html), but that anything wanting to actually use
| GPU capabilities may well need to be aware as well.
|
| --
|
| What I have heard on the GPU drivers situation is that
| Radeon used to be terrible (and NVIDIA less terrible
| despite doing things its own way rather than the standard
| way), but that they overhauled it all completely so that
| for at least the last five years it's been great.
| jandrese wrote:
| For what it's worth I've had a fairly easy time with nVidia
| on Linux. My daily driver is an Ubuntu 20 machine where I
| just selected the nVidia binary blob option from a menu and
| it just works, even through kernel upgrades.
|
| But this is also just about the easiest setup. I might feel
| differently if I were on a laptop with dual graphics cards.
| mattnewton wrote:
| I see, I guess I must just be on Nvidia's happy path: I use
| a Debian distro similar to Ubuntu at work and Ubuntu at
| home with X windows and have experienced no problems; I
| didn't know that there might be dragons if I try to stray
| from that.
| marmaduke wrote:
| just a few datapoints, the Dell Ubuntu machines (4+) we've
| received, I just do the "Additional Drivers", click Nvidia,
| reboot and stuff like TensorFlow just works. CentOS (RHEL)
| same.
|
| I think if you start messing with one of distributions not
| on the CUDA download paper, you get stuck easily, but at
| least for work purposes, I don't see the point of using
| something other than RHEL/CentOS/Fedora/Debian.
| zwaps wrote:
| I have to use Nvidia bc of Cuda, as does everyone else who
| does ML on Linux, which is a large majority of people doing
| ML.
|
| Long story short, it works. On Desktop, that is.
|
| So I an not sure how representative your opinion is.
|
| On the other hand, I had gpu problems on Linus with
| literally every single laptop I have ever owned,
| independent of Gpu brand. So there's that.
| nicolaslem wrote:
| Not OP but I'm also avoiding anything with Nvidia in it. Half
| of the reason is voting with my wallet, as you mentioned.
| This other half is feeling much more confident that the
| hardware will be supported and compatible with Linux in the
| long term.
| Bluerise wrote:
| OpenBSD obviously doesn't have NVIDIA support, but amdgpu(4)
| works pretty well. I'd also prefer to use AMD's own GPU, not
| only because I can't use NVIDIA, but also because I don't
| support NVIDIA's business practice.
| fossuser wrote:
| This was largely my experience too and always confused me
| about people saying AMD was better for Linux.
|
| Nvidia proprietary drivers existed and worked, the AMD stuff
| was worse.
|
| It makes more sense if it's about open vs. proprietary rather
| than what works better.
|
| Though sounds like things may have changed since then.
| awill wrote:
| I've run intel/nvidia with Arch Linux for the last 14
| years.
|
| I upgraded recently from an intel/nvidia setup (GTX 1070)
| to a zen3 w/ a Radeon 6800. Honestly, both nvidia and AMD
| have excellent support on Linux. Both hardware decode, play
| steam games, are stable, support the latest kernel etc..
|
| However, latest steam games (and proton in particular) is
| better tested against Mesa (AMD OSS drivers), so it's the
| place to be for gaming on linux. AMD also tears less on
| Linux, and supports Wayland (though Wayland support could
| be the reason for less tearing).
|
| Either way, I'm fully AMD now and wouldn't go back. I see
| zero downsides, and a few upsides.
| drwu wrote:
| About better linux support: VDPAU does not have browser
| hardware accelerated video decoding yet. It seems both AMD
| and Intel based on VA have this feature already.
|
| However, I had to choose NVIDIA only because of CUDA.
| pachico wrote:
| You forgot a key element for me, which is a matte screen.
| novaleaf wrote:
| beware NVidia hybrid GPU's in laptops. I have had 4 such
| laptops, all 4 suffered from graphics problems. 2 ended up
| dead. 1 works great but the Nvidia GPU is no longer detected
| (???) And the last one still works, but graphics crash about
| every 4 hours when the gpu is under heavy load (I think due to
| heat)
| magicalhippo wrote:
| Here you can get a Huawei Matebook 14[1] which fits those specs
| as far as I can see, including the 3:2 aspect ratio.
|
| Never bought Huawei so no experiences to share.
|
| [1]:
| https://consumer.huawei.com/en/laptops/matebook-14-amd-2020/...
| chrismorgan wrote:
| 2160x1440 (185ppi) is a touch on the low side, though
| admittedly very close to 2560x1440 on a 15.6'' display
| (188ppi; I confess I had that resolution more in mind for a
| 13'' or 14'' chassis). But definitely far less than the
| ~275ppi of my Surface Book's 3000x2000!
|
| This definitely looks an interesting machine, but it seems
| they're not selling it in Australia, so alas, _I_ can't get
| it. Otherwise I'd be very strongly considering it.
| godzillabrennus wrote:
| Buy it through a USA based VAR. Small ones exist that can
| likely help. Case in point: https://greenbeetech.com/
| lukevp wrote:
| I have a huawei mate book x pro and it's great! It's got
| the 3:2 aspect ratio and a higher resolution screen, touch,
| 16 gigs of ram, etc. it is super nice, but it does have
| nvidia.
| thestu wrote:
| https://www.acer.com/ac/en/US/content/model/NX.HULAA.003 They
| mention an optional 2560x1440 monitor but it's right alongside
| a mention of an Intel CPU, which is incorrect, so maybe the
| 2560x1440 is incorrect also.
| loufe wrote:
| 4K is a little much even for 17" screens. I think 1440p is a
| better size.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Use the HiDPI feature or simply larger fonts if it is hard to
| read. My 15" laptop is 4k and I wouldn't give up the clarity
| to go back to the old days.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| My Surface Book is 267ppi (3000x2000, 13.5''). It's very
| good, but at typical viewing distances it's still
| unquestionably lower than the human eye is capable of
| resolving. I doubt there's _much_ value in going higher, but
| it's not _useless_ , either--if all else was equal, 400ppi
| would certainly be more pleasant to look upon than 267ppi.
|
| 4K on 17'' is 260ppi, which I reckon is pretty good. On 13''
| or 14'', full 4K is probably a little bit of overkill at
| present (315-340ppi), but 1440p is definitely less than I'd
| _like_ even on a 13'' monitor (226ppi).
|
| Of course, it's always a matter of balance, because all else
| is _not_ equal; higher resolution means higher cost, higher
| power consumption, higher memory usage, and higher processing
| requirements. But I'd definitely prefer 4K to 1440p even at
| 13''.
| gomjabbar wrote:
| External monitors are typically used farther way from the
| eye compared to a laptop screen - have you tried 4k at 24"
| ? It may achieve what you are looking for.
| gshulegaard wrote:
| Ah man, you are describing my ideal laptop as well.
|
| I don't have a solution for you, but I have had good
| experiences with System76 in the past and am hoping that
| upcoming laptop refreshes should start to hit those points or
| me as well.
|
| Ideally this gets a better screen:
|
| https://system76.com/laptops/pangolin
|
| Or this gets a Ryzen APU and a 16:10 aspect ratio:
|
| https://system76.com/laptops/lemur
|
| But those are dreams at this point...
| Osiris wrote:
| I have a system76 but it uses an NVIDIA GPU for the external
| monitors.
|
| It works fine when plugged in, but I basically don't use it
| as a portable computer because it's such a pain to switch
| back to Intel graphics. There are some options for hybrid
| graphics but it limits the options I have for external
| monitor orientation.
| gshulegaard wrote:
| Graphics switching remains somewhat painful in the Linux
| ecosystem. There are options but nothing that quite
| achieves the seamlessness of Windows or Mac solutions.
|
| Did you get the System76 with PopOS? I was impressed with
| my last one with the desktop menu that allowed graphics
| switching (albeit after a restart).
|
| https://support.system76.com/articles/graphics-switch-pop/
|
| Which I think is just a wrapper around the nvidia drivers,
| but at least I didn't have to install it myself and the
| menu location is a tad more convenient.
| Osiris wrote:
| yeah the restart is the problem, it adds a lot of
| overhead if I'm just running to a meeting or something.
| There is a Prime option but you can only use external
| monitors in standard landscape and I use mine in
| portrait.
| Thaxll wrote:
| Nvida drivers are better than AMD one on Linux and windows.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| Of Windows, I have no comment; but Linux-- _what!?_
|
| I have heard, and keep on hearing of, _many_ tales of
| problems with NVIDIA drivers on Linux, and there's some
| functionality from the GPU that simply isn't exposed in a
| usable way on Linux.
|
| But I can only think of hearing of one problem with AMD
| (integrated or discrete GPU) drivers within the last five
| years, and that one was promptly fixed (it was a missing
| break statement that caused I think it was the RX 570 to be
| misclassified). But generally speaking, provided you have a
| recent enough kernel, I gather that it all just works,
| perfectly.
|
| Now admittedly AMD GPUs are less common than NVIDIA ones, but
| even taking that into account the evidence is
| _overwhelmingly_ against NVIDIA.
| Thaxll wrote:
| Everyone using CUDA on Linux are usually using Ubuntu +
| Nvidia drivers, so no it doesn't sucks. The only down side
| is that its closed source and does not work with Wayland.
| Overall Nvidia has just more people working on those
| drivers than AMD.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| What I repeatedly hear is that _even with_ the
| proprietary drivers, it's not terribly uncommon for
| people to still have serious problems, and that not
| everything can use the acceleration (e.g. from elsewhere
| in the thread, "VDPAU does not have browser hardware
| accelerated video decoding yet").
|
| I'm by no means sure, but the impression I've received of
| AMD GPUs is that all functionality of the GPU is
| available and functional. And no one ever seems to have
| trouble getting normal things working.
| ohyes wrote:
| So, I looked on the AMD shop online and it looks like the MSI
| Bravo 15 satisfies all of these requirements, it is surprising
| that there was only one laptop in the AMD store that seems to
| satisfy this.
|
| I'm in the USA, maybe that makes a difference.
| _coveredInBees wrote:
| They seem to only have a FHD (1080p) screen with 16:9 aspect-
| ratio though?
|
| https://us.msi.com/Laptop/Bravo-15-A4DX/Specification
| ohyes wrote:
| ah, that would do it, I was trying to figure out what the
| issue would be with it.
|
| Is it possible that they just don't sell 4:3 screens very
| much anymore? I can't imagine why.
|
| (Google tells me this is the case, 4:3 is the old standard
| and not made much anymore).
| chrismorgan wrote:
| It's the resolution I care about more than the aspect
| ratio. A squarer aspect ratio would just be the icing on
| top. But yeah, if you're happy with 1920x1080, then it's
| not too difficult to find machines satisfying the other
| two requirements.
| _coveredInBees wrote:
| I think it's just that unfortunately a lot of these
| laptops are geared towards gamers, and pretty much all
| gaming laptops have 16:9 aspect-ratio, and they also
| usually use high refresh-rate screens, which are also
| almost entirely in 16:9 aspect-ratio.
| masklinn wrote:
| > I have not found a single device that satisfies all three of
| these requirements. Any two, sure, but not all three.
|
| And for even more fun you can add a 4th: ECC.
| jandrese wrote:
| That requirement could be a roll of the dice. Get the laptop
| with the Ryzen processor and hope that the BIOS just happens
| to have ECC enabled and buy the right DIMMs. It's not
| something you're likely to see as a bullet point in the
| feature list except on some kind of hideously expensive
| "industrial" laptop, which would probably fail all of the
| other critera.
| 1996 wrote:
| I would pay good money for it.
| e12e wrote:
| Microsoft surface laptop 4 is likely to be this - looks like
| the 3 was close - except for poor battery:
|
| https://www.pcworld.com/article/3449758/microsoft-surface-la...
| chrismorgan wrote:
| But it's unlikely to be great at Linux out of the box. The
| Surface families have a history of doing things their own
| way, which means being poor at running Linux until people
| reverse-engineer things. Per https://github.com/linux-
| surface/linux-surface/wiki/Supporte..., Surface Laptop 3
| (AMD) still isn't perfect: like most of the Surface families
| it requires a special kernel for most stuff to work, and the
| touchscreen and pen support don't work (admittedly
| functionality outright missing from most laptops, so perhaps
| not a big deal), and if you suspend it, you need an external
| keyboard to wake it up again!
|
| Also I'm shocked at the price hike from 16GB RAM, 512GB
| storage to 32GB RAM, 1TB storage: it goes up from AUD 2931 to
| AUD 4399. _A $1,468 increase._ I would consider $468 not
| unreasonable (even though the retail cost delta on the actual
| _parts_ should be under half of that), but it's like they
| hoped you wouldn't notice them slipping an extra $1,000 onto
| the price. But then, given that the second and third
| configurations increase the first's $1,699 by $425 to
| increase 128GB of storage to 256GB (that's more than even
| _Apple_ charge for such things!), and then by another $255 to
| increase 8GB of RAM to 16GB, perhaps I shouldn't be
| surprised. Still am, though.
| e12e wrote:
| I didn't see Linux support in your 3 points, though!
|
| As an owner of a surface 4 pro, I feel the pain of _almost_
| good Linux support - and is a little surprised and dismayed
| at the rate of mainline kernel support.
|
| Also agreed on the pricing model - but in my experience the
| hardware is very good. Arguably, I prefer it to Apple hw
| (except for the m1 cpu, that looks nice).
| chrismorgan wrote:
| Eh, I reckoned it was kinda implied in my reasons for
| wanting no NVIDIA.
|
| I also didn't say "must have more than 4GB of RAM". :-)
|
| (A funny fact about it all is that I purchased the
| Surface Book a few years back simply because its hardware
| was so good on paper for what I wanted to do that I was
| willing even to switch from Linux back to Windows.
| Admittedly I would never have done it without WSL
| existing, but still. Anyway, a few years later I'm
| hankering to get back to Arch Linux and i3, or perhaps
| Sway now. The Surface Book has been good hardware, except
| that unit #1 was developing some problems at the age of
| 19 months, #2 was basically DOA, #3 had Battery 1
| disappear after four months, and a couple of weeks ago #4
| at the age of 21/4 had its Battery 1 die in a more
| unpleasant way: the computer will spontaneously lose
| power typically 1-4 times per day. But I have probably
| used it an average of over 10 hours a day, and regularly
| very heavily at that, except for its dGPU which is almost
| untouched.)
| [deleted]
| em500 wrote:
| Since people are probably curious: the Ryzen 7 5800U (8-core, 15W
| TDP) will probably be close to (but not equal to or better than)
| Apple's M1 in performance (based on specs and desktop Zen3
| Geekbench scores). But they will probably have significantly
| worse efficiency. With idle / low-CPU workload, it's probably not
| too bad (17-21hr on 53Wh battery), but if you're compiling on
| your laptop all day I'd expect much worse battery life than
| Apple's M1 laptops.
| Findeton wrote:
| I will get a 5800U nevertheless and avoid Apple's walled
| garden.
| SXX wrote:
| Now we only need proper laptops with AMD hardware. Mostly
| everything I seen before in dreadful state and Intel monopoly
| on the market doesn't help.
| SXX wrote:
| Apple M1 has 4 hours on battery life when playing games. Is it
| much better during heavy C++ compilation or Java builds?
|
| PS: 4 hours on Air M1
| holmium wrote:
| The only C++ M1 time and battery benchmark I remember is from
| Matthew Panzarino[1]. He found that it took the M1 Air 25
| minutes to do a fresh compile of WebKit, and that the Air had
| 91% battery remaining after finishing the compilation.
|
| So, roughly assuming that you could compile WebKit 10 times
| before the laptop runs out of juice, that'd give you 4 hours
| 10 minutes of battery life.
|
| -----
|
| [1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/11/17/yeah-apples-m1-macbook-
| pro...
| [deleted]
| hmottestad wrote:
| I really hope they can compete. As much as I would love Apple
| to pull ahead by a mile, it's not going to help the computer
| space that much.
|
| I have some Android friends who are super happy with their
| phones. When they ask why I'm upgrading my iPhone again and I
| say "it's got a lot better performance" they usually say
| something like "why do you need a faster phone....my midrange 3
| year old android phone is blazingly fast".
|
| It's not until we lift all users in general that we will be
| able to create new and innovative software. I like to compare
| an old school project where they had to create a spell
| checker...but this was back when you didn't have enough ram to
| keep the dictionary in memory.
|
| More memory and faster CPUs make yesterday's challenges trivial
| for today's developers.
| cbozeman wrote:
| Reading this, I can only assume you want to be one of those
| people that Ubuntu targeted years ago, who can plug their
| phone into a dock and have the same power as top-tier desktop
| computer.
|
| Otherwise, I don't really see the point. Every machine has a
| different purpose.
|
| My telephone is for phone calls, texting, extremely light
| emailing, checking weather, using it as a GPS, occasionally
| taking a photo or a quick video.
|
| My Surface Book 3 is for actual on-the-road document work,
| programming, light gaming, and digital painting.
|
| My Ryzen Threadripper / RTX 3090 workstation at home is for
| no-shit, actual income-generating work and super-heavy-duty
| gaming.
|
| My Panasonic Lumix DC-S1H is for videography, but my Canon
| EOS R5 is for highest-quality stills, and my Sony A7C is for
| travelling.
|
| Every one of those cameras has different purposes, different
| use cases. Just like the rest of my hardware. There is no
| "one size fits all" anywhere, for anything.
|
| > More memory and faster CPUs make yesterday's challenges
| trivial for today's developers.
|
| Today's developers are by-and-large utter shit at designing
| software. Its usually poorly thought-out, poorly-documented,
| and poorly-maintained. The number of truly exceptional
| software programs out there is incredibly sparse.
| Out_of_Characte wrote:
| But really, What do you need more cpu power on the phone for?
| email, whatsapp and a browser is about everything I can
| envision my phone for. Nothing innovative I can think of is
| going to change anything about what people use and need their
| phone for. Not that I'm against progress, better screens,
| lower latencies and faster loading are always appreciated.
| daxelrod wrote:
| For many people, their phone is their primary computing
| device. Sometimes their only computing device.
|
| Large numbers of people use their phones for games,
| video/photo editing, videoconferencing (which can involve
| real time image processing for virtual backgrounds and
| appearance filters).
|
| At the low end of the phone market, phone hardware performs
| significantly better today than it did two years ago for
| those tasks.
| The_Colonel wrote:
| > they usually say something like "why do you need a faster
| phone....my midrange 3 year old android phone is blazingly
| fast
|
| Yes, there aren't a lot of valid reasons to spend over ~200
| Euro for a phone these days (unless you're tech enthusiast).
| ip26 wrote:
| It's hard to agree completely with this. On the one hand
| you can accomplish just about anything with a $150 phone,
| and I used one for many years. Recently though my midrange
| 2 year old phone could barely keep up with certain basic
| apps, and a upper-mid phone has been night-and-day higher
| quality usage experience.
|
| I suspect a mix of Wirth's Law plus a lower level of polish
| on things like drivers on cheaper phones (inexplicably poor
| WiFi stability, for example)
| The_Colonel wrote:
| I know that the situation with mid-range phones was not
| always so rosy. I was myself buying mostly high-end
| phones in the past.
|
| But recently my friend bought a Motorola for 200 Euro -
| Snapdragon 730, 6 GB RAM, 128 GB UFS 2.1 storage, pretty
| good main camera + (so-so) ultrawide, (gimmicky) macro
| camera, 5000 mAh battery. I was very impressed what can
| 200 Euro these days buy. I'm pretty confident this phone
| will do just fine in 2 years too ...
| sudosysgen wrote:
| It will be significantly faster the M1 in multicore performance
| and slightly slower in single core.
|
| Compiles that use multiple cores with end significantly faster
| and thus battery life will be compensated.
| pja wrote:
| > but if you're compiling on your laptop all day I'd expect
| much worse battery life than Apple's M1 laptops.
|
| On the flip side, you get 8 full fat cores instead of 4 fast &
| 4 not so fast, so your compile jobs might go a bit quicker.
| Have to wait for the benchmarks to find out for sure.
| brnt wrote:
| Is there any word on slower desktop variants? A followup to the
| 1300/3100?
| voidmain0001 wrote:
| I have been waiting for Lenovo to release the Legion 7 Slim with
| the 4900H to replace my aged Lenovo Thinkpad 540p, but a 7 Slim
| with a 5000 series would be drool worthy for me.
| acd wrote:
| Will be nice of there will be Mini ITX/media HTPC variants of
| this CPU.
|
| You can play games and media on 14-45W CPU TDP which should be
| very quiet from fan noise.
| pimeys wrote:
| And with two nics, so you could build a home router and server
| with freebsd and jails serving all your needs.
|
| One can dream...
| foolmeonce wrote:
| No updates in the area of GPU might be a good thing for me, can
| anyone share experiences regarding Linux with the 4000?
| scns wrote:
| Check phoronix.com, there should be several articles about it.
| toolz wrote:
| I have a 4700u, some device issues at first (touchpad, namely)
| that work now (as is the case with all brand new laptop models)
| - AMD cpus are beasts though - can't wait until they start
| putting them in higher build quality laptops.
| hydroxideOH- wrote:
| I run Arch on the HP Envy x360 with a ryzen 4500u and it's a
| very smooth experience, I've had no issues. I did have Ubuntu
| on it at first and it may have been a bad install, but it was
| terrible. Half the time I'd turn on the laptop and something
| different would be broken.
| teekert wrote:
| I wanted a Ryzen 4000 (for a home server), it was never available
| anywhere. I got an i3. I feel a bit said.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| Ryzen 5000 Mobile: U Series (not all Zen 3)
|
| These things are so frustrating... 5700U probably performs worse
| than 5600U in real life scenarios. I liked that in the previous
| laptop generation I could just tell my girlfriend to look for a
| 4000x AMD CPU, and she got an amazing laptop deal at the end.
| other_herbert wrote:
| Now you have to also make sure the 2nd digit is even... I feel
| like this has happened in the past, the odd / even signified a
| different architecture.. don't remember if it was Intel or Amd
| though
| [deleted]
| kllrnohj wrote:
| It's so dumb that there's a few zen2 SKUs under the 5000 name.
| They skipped 4000 on the desktop so that mobile and desktop could
| have the same name for the same generation only to immediately
| screw it up.
| whatch wrote:
| AMD hardware names look like a mess for me, but is it really
| different from Intel's i3-i9 cpus for both desktops and
| laptops?
| neogodless wrote:
| If you really want to be confused, try to figure out which
| laptops have Coffee/Ice/Tiger Lake and whether it's 10nm or
| 14nm.
|
| Take a look at 10th gen Intel mobile processors: https://en.w
| ikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_processors#Lates... (You'll
| have to scroll a page or two)
|
| 11th gen seems to be a mix of Tiger Lake and the upcoming
| Rocket Lake iterations.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| My thoughts exactly. Couldn't they have released those Zen2
| parts as refreshed 4000 series, which they are?
|
| This feels like they're trying to scam less knowledgeable
| consumers. WTF is going on at AMD?
|
| Also, the Zen3 iGPU is still Vega not RDNA2. WTF AMD?! They
| could integrate RDNA2 in the console Zen2 APUs but the PC Zen3
| chips are still running a GPU from 2017 which is based on an
| architecture from 2012! How is this possible, it just seems
| crazu to me.
| tehbeard wrote:
| Consoles have more space for proper cooling solutions? That's
| the only reason I can think.
| tw04 wrote:
| I would bet it's more likely that the OEM who is using and
| asked for those chips demanded they be a 5000 series part so
| that customers weren't skipping it over because of "last
| gen".
|
| I completely agree it's dishonest, I'm not sure you can blame
| AMD though. If Dell (I'm not saying this was Dell), came to
| you and said: either this chip is 5000 or I don't carry ANY
| of your chips, you give them what they want.
|
| To me this shows AMD has learned its lesson: without the OEMs
| onboard you aren't going anywhere. Selling individual chips
| to gamers is profitable, but that only goes so far.
| csharptwdec19 wrote:
| They probably also learned it from their time in the GPU
| arena, where such shenanigans have been in play for a long
| time (although usually moreso by the green team)
| [deleted]
| Latty wrote:
| This isn't a new practice, and it isn't specific to AMD:
|
| Here is an LTT video from years ago talking about it:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEileqxmags
| Jonnax wrote:
| The reason is time to market.
|
| Intel are releasing new laptop parts said to beat their 4000
| series, so they need to continue being competitive out of the
| door.
|
| Also their highest margin chips are going to be pared with
| discrete GPUs.
| neogodless wrote:
| I don't know if "scam" is exactly the right word, though the
| sentiment is likely close enough. At those lower levels
| anyone buying those laptops is going to have _much_ more
| power than they need. Someone buying a Ryzen 5 4500U to do
| regular spreadsheets, email, documents, video conferencing,
| etc. will have ample horsepower. And a Ryzen 5 5500U is not
| much different. The clocks (base, all-core turbo) might even
| be lower, though the GPU is slightly better. However, for
| that kind of user, they might get better battery life, and if
| they fire up games, a better experience.
|
| This isn't ideal if you upgrade every generation - that
| wouldn't be worth it. But in those $500-600 laptops, it
| probably doesn't hurt. I suspect they have Zen 2 chiplet
| supply and buyers in that price range will be plenty happy.
| If they really need more CPU power from Zen 3, they could
| step up to Ryzen 5 5600U. So _you need to be better educated_
| on those little nuances, but only if you really need the CPU
| power.
|
| Presumably anyone buying that doesn't dig into these details
| reads reviews and looks at the benchmarks on those reviews
| based on programs they run that are CPU intensive. Otherwise,
| they probably won't be affected greatly by the difference.
|
| It's not ideal but given supply chain issues, it might be a
| necessary evil.
| Out_of_Characte wrote:
| I remember the lowest sku's almost always being a last
| generation part. which seem to be more about economics than
| uninformed buyers. You _can_ buy a last generation laptop
| with a 4500u however there is merit to buying a new laptop
| with all new features the laptop itself provides. Also, the
| design might be 'last generation' however that does not
| mean its exactly the same. which is important because
| architectural changes can and have caused problems that
| were adressed in later revisions of the same cpu. You'd be
| surprised how much effort most people put in to researching
| consumer electronics decisions. their knowledge might
| scratch the surface of what technical people know months in
| advance to a cpu launch but it is significant nonetheless.
| numpad0 wrote:
| The confusing part is Zen3 and Zen2 SKUs are intermeshed
| among U tier processors, 5800U/5600U are Zen3 and
| 5700U/5500U/5300U are Zen2.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Rebadging last-gen products into the current-gen lineup is
| a genuine value add for me as a customer.
|
| If I'm buying a new product, I want to see a lineup of
| exactly the products a given company thinks are
| competitive, ordered by price or performance. I don't want
| to have to pore over review articles and youtube videos to
| figure out how many performance grades correspond to how
| many generational jumps and cross reference to older
| generations. I just don't.
| helloworld653 wrote:
| "I don't want to have to pore over review articles and
| youtube videos to figure out how many performance grades
| correspond to how many generational jumps and cross
| reference to older generations. I just don't."
|
| If they named things properly and wouldn't mix
| generations within a single generational series marketing
| campaign (5xxx series), you wouldn't have to - as a
| consumer, if you wanted to buy the best, you would buy
| the 5000 series. They would still carry 4xxx stock - if
| you wanted something at a different price point, you'd
| buy the 4xxx series.
|
| AMD's choice to mix generations within the same series
| makes things more confusing, not less confusing.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| That's only true if generations don't overlap in
| performance. If they do overlap, either the company
| "ports" the old products into the new lineup or you're in
| for considerable homework.
| helloworld653 wrote:
| What is the point then in up-branding a chip with
| identical performance that spans two different process
| generations?
|
| Do the two different generations have different TDP
| envelopes? I though the 5xxx and 4xxx series both use
| Vega - what is the appreciable product difference between
| Zen 2 and Zen 3 if the performance/TDP/graphics
| performance is the same?
| leetcrew wrote:
| I think you are kinda answering your own question here?
| the difference between Zen 2 and Zen 3 is that they are
| different architectures. there may not be an appreciable
| _product_ difference between a mid /high bin Zen 2 part
| and a low/mid bin Zen 3 part. this is why we have SKUs;
| they take a spreadsheet worth of details and compress
| them into a rough total ordering of price/performance.
|
| the point is that it's annoying to compare 4000 series
| parts against 5000 series parts to figure out what is the
| best budget AMD CPU. outside of enthusiast circles, no
| one cares about being on the latest architecture. they
| care about what is currently the best performing part
| within their budget.
| nly wrote:
| Equivalence between desktop and mobile chips is largely make-
| believe anyway given the different thermal and power envelopes.
| waheoo wrote:
| It's about knowing when you buy a "new laptop" in the store
| that it has current gen chips.
|
| The amount of times I find old gen Mac's sold at new gen Mac
| prices in stores is disturbing.
| soperj wrote:
| Didn't most new gen Mac's have old cpus in them anyway? I
| remember the Air going like 5 years or something without a
| refresh.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| The difference in thermals and power really just impacts
| boost clocks. It's not a very significant difference
| otherwise, at least not in the CPU space and especially not
| in single-core performance.
|
| A max-draw zen3 desktop core is only 20w. You'll see that in
| these laptops, or near enough to make no difference.
| slezyr wrote:
| There are just two models with AMD and HiDPI displays: Microsoft
| Surface Laptop 3, Asus ROG Zephyrus G14. It seems that the laptop
| market simply ignores AMD's mobile CPUs for middle-, high- end
| laptops.
| agloeregrets wrote:
| This probably comes off way off base but it's worth mentioning
| that Apple's new MacBooks also offer greater perfromance than
| most Ryzen 4000 chips (faster than all in single core, faster
| than most in multi) while offering pretty HiDPI stuff. Granted
| no Linux or W10. So the market clearly is there for them to
| hit.
| tw04 wrote:
| And you can write off the Surface because it's a 3000 series
| chip which was... not good.
|
| At least this generation seems to have far more OEM wins which
| will hopefully result in better displays.
| danieldk wrote:
| Not HiDPI, but the ThinkPad T14 AMD is a pretty good business
| laptop with AMD Ryzen 7 Pro. Also with extensible memory and
| replaceable NVMe SSD as a cherry on top. There is also the less
| extendable but slimmer T14s.
|
| Source: I own a T14 AMD. I am pretty happy with it after 13
| years of MacBooks and returning a MacBook Air M1. With 8 cores
| it's fast for development and the fan is not very loud (nowhere
| near as loud as Intel MacBooks),
| pimeys wrote:
| How is Linux with it now in 2021. I'm currently not needing a
| new laptop, having the T25 and just replaced a US keyboard to
| it, it'll be great for the next 10-15 years.
|
| But, if I need a laptop from the company, I'd definitely look
| into the AMD series of ThinkPads, if I could get a good Arch
| Linux experience with it.
| forty wrote:
| With a 5.10 kernel, everything works perfectly fine (at
| least everything I use). Note that I use Debian bullseye.
|
| It's much much less noisy that my work laptop T480s. The
| fans don't run too often, and I find them very discreet.
| deckard1 wrote:
| I recently received the ThinkPad P14s AMD (same as T14) that
| I ordered back in November. I only paid about $800 US for
| this, with some corporate discounts that most people can
| easily find. Comparing it to my Macbook, I'm pleasantly
| surprised. It's only 1080p, but I really don't mind it at all
| because it's matte instead of glossy. And the keyboard is
| pure bliss compared to just about anything.
|
| > with extensible memory and replaceable NVMe SSD
|
| Not only that, but there is a WWAN slot that you can add an
| additional NVMe drive to. You can find 512GB 2242 form factor
| drives on AliExpress for about $50. There are 1GB ones for
| about $100. That's my current experiment. Hoping to dual boot
| Windows and Linux.
|
| But this thing has an _ethernet_ port. In 2021. And all the
| other ports you 'll ever need. Mine came with an Intel Wi-Fi
| 6 card installed in a slot which would appear can be upgraded
| or replaced as well. Just insane utility. I even like the
| soft feel of the case more than the cold aluminum of the
| Macbook.
| kilburn wrote:
| Lucky you, but they don't want my money.
|
| Lenovo does not sell ANY AMD-equipped Thinkpad in Spain as of
| right now because they are all sold out [1]. The Ryzen 7
| version in particular was sold out a mere 1 week after launch
| and hasn't been available since.
|
| To add insult to injury, they have announced 5 new thinkpads
| (X1 Titanium Yoga, X12 Detachable, X1 Yoga Gen6, X1 Nano, X1
| Carbon Gen9) but all of them are intel-based. [2]
|
| [1] https://www.lenovo.com/es/es/laptops/c/LAPTOPS#view-all
|
| [2] https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/events/ces/products#laptops
| danieldk wrote:
| _Lucky you, but they don 't want my money. Lenovo does not
| sell ANY AMD-equipped Thinkpad in Spain_
|
| That's frustrating. I am in the Netherlands and when I
| decided to buy it, I picked it up the next day. It's also
| in stock now:
|
| https://www.coolblue.nl/product/862275/lenovo-
| thinkpad-t14-2...
|
| Interestingly, it's now 60 Euro more expensive than when I
| bought it. I guess the new lockdown drives prices up due to
| people working from home?
| u678u wrote:
| I think its more they're in short supply. You look at Thinkpad
| AMD laptops and many are one month+ wait times.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| I'm wondering at this point whether it's TSMC supply
| constraints. Intel still wins in sheer number of fabs producing
| their product. If you can't actually get enough AMD chips to
| ship your laptop...
| NewLogic wrote:
| Paper launches everywhere, as far as the eye can see.
| llampx wrote:
| > It seems that the laptop market simply ignores AMD's mobile
| CPUs for middle-, high- end laptops.
|
| It seems that's changing from this year's lineup, looking at
| Asus and Acer and Lenovo. Intel partners like Dell are not in
| my buying list.
| neogodless wrote:
| Yeah I think the OEM landscape is rapidly evolving for AMD.
|
| Before Ryzen 4000 / 2020, you could pretty much only get
| budget laptops with relatively cheap chassis, abysmal screens
| (1366x768!), low-end graphics, spinning disk HDD, that sort
| of thing.
|
| Starting in 2020 Ryzen 4000 you started to get reasonably
| good 1080p Ryzen laptops, but they seemed quite artificially
| limited to RTX 2060, rarely over 300 nits, often 16GB or
| lower, no more than 144Hz in most cases. If you'd shuffle
| over to Intel, you'd find RTX 2080, 500 nits, 32GB, 300Hz
| screens, and QHD/4K.
|
| Already in 2021 we're seeing (announced) QHD screens, up to
| 360Hz, RTX 3080, 32GB.
|
| (I've been looking for high refresh and prefer gaming
| laptops, so I'm less clear on what's available in business
| laptops with 4K, etc.)
| posguy wrote:
| Even during the Ryzen 2000 generation you could find
| reasonably priced laptops with 1080p screens, though the
| compromise would be a tiny SSD or spinning rust.
| ylere wrote:
| I really hope there will be more high quality non gaming laptops
| with good availability. Especially in the upper tier it seems
| most manufacturers kept their Intel designs (not sure if due to
| availability, costs of adapting to the AMD platform, pressure by
| Intel or a combination of these).
| acomjean wrote:
| Based on some recent "previews" it seems that 2021 will have a
| lot more amd laptops.
|
| Dave2d previewed a pile of asus ones recently . Some are gaming
| but lots are multi use
|
| https://youtu.be/_o-D-bgXAKM
| neogodless wrote:
| In January 2020 at CES, Lisa Su said AMD had 100+ laptop
| design wins. This year she said they had 150+.
|
| I am not sure how this compares to Intel, but I saw two
| slides for Intel's Tiger Lake and Rocket Lake, and one said
| 40+ design wins. The other said 40+ refreshed designs.
| rowanG077 wrote:
| TBH. The amount doesn't matter. It's about the quality.
| There isn't a single Ryzen 4000 laptop that I want to buy
| because all of them either have:
|
| 1. Shit screen.
|
| 2. Are not 13 inch
|
| I would pay premium for a Ryzen 5800u dell XPS.
| neogodless wrote:
| Oh I get that! I have different preferences (think HP
| Omen 15, Lenovo Legion 5) but those weren't available at
| a good price until late summer (and really only when
| sales occurred). Anyone wanting QHD or 4K was out of luck
| last year. Wanting Ryzen but also wanting a 500-nit
| screen is not a great feeling.
|
| I'm actually selling my HP Omen 15 to my brother because
| I discovered it uses PWM for brightness, and I have a
| very high sensitivity - if I turn brightness down from
| 100% I get a headache within an hour or two. (I mostly
| prefer 100% brightness but when on battery I'd like to
| turn it down.)
|
| Fingers crossed 2021 is a big improvement from 2020 for
| Ryzen laptops.
| noir_lord wrote:
| Bought the missus the Zenbook with the 4700U in for xmas,
| that has a nice enough screen and it absolutely crushes
| my thinkpad. i7-7700HQ passmark 6988
| Ryzen 4700U passmark 13801 Ryzen 2700X (my
| desktop) 17618
|
| The 4800U actually outscores my 2700X desktop.
|
| My next desktop (5950X) would score 45970.
|
| We live in interesting times in the CPU world.
|
| She uses it for youtube.
|
| It is however _screaming_ fast for a laptop.
| rowanG077 wrote:
| FHD (1920 x 1080) 16:9 screen. And get this. It DOES NOT
| have an audio jack. I thought I was being trolled at
| first.
| Wafje wrote:
| I am in the same boat. Lets hope this year brings some
| quality 15inch+ 19:10+ Ryzen Laptops.
| Tsarbomb wrote:
| The crunch for space at TSMC must be much worse than we realize
| for AMD to still use Vega which is made at GlobalFoundries.
|
| With that said, this is some impressive logistical and supply
| chain juggling on AMDs part.
| cbozeman wrote:
| Your initial idea is still correct though, the crunch for space
| at TSMC is truly awful.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Zen3 and Zen2 are monolithic. The Vega GPU is on the same die
| as the CPU, not a separately fabbed part.
| Tsarbomb wrote:
| Oh damn you are correct. Okay, then I don't understand the
| continued use of Vega unless RDNA2 doesn't scale well to low
| voltage yet.
| enragedcacti wrote:
| My understanding is that there is little benefit in
| upgrading the iGPU to RDNA2 because of the bandwidth
| limitations imposed by sharing ddr4 with the CPU. We should
| see some real improvements in iPGU performance once ddr5
| rolls out late 2021/early 2022.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| Probably just a no need type of thing. The Vega 8 is plenty
| fine for normal desktop usage, and they already had it
| integrated into Zen2. So just plop in the new Zen3 CPU and
| call it a day?
|
| Which is for comparison basically what they did on the
| desktop side. The Ryzen 5000 desktop CPUs use the exact
| same IO die as the Ryzen 3000 line.
| pedrocr wrote:
| Maybe they skipped 7nm and are going straight to 5nm for
| RDNA2 in CPUs. Zen4 based mobile chips will probably be a
| very interesting release.
| flatiron wrote:
| Is it just me or does it feel like in the past 5-7 years it
| doesn't really make that much of a difference when new CPUs come
| out? My laptop is a i7-4800MQ and it still feels incredibly
| snappy. Anything I need to do for work I just farm out to AWS.
| All of my gaming is on Stadia. Personally its just easier for me
| to use the cloud for all of these things instead of cycling
| through devices all the time.
| dijit wrote:
| It's not just you. CPUs have stagnated massively.
|
| Intel CPUs still give 16 PCI lanes on the consumer chips,
| despite any modern graphics card using that entirely.
|
| (Meaning your nvme drives all compete somewhat).
|
| Compared to phones which have real, huge, generational
| improvements every couple of years which is sometimes jarring.
|
| However, this is different.
|
| AMDs previous Ryzen laptop line performed incredibly well, both
| in power consumption (which equates to battery life) and
| thermal envelope (which, also equates to battery life) while
| also delivering jaw dropping performance.
|
| I am a "devops" and farm out a lot of compute to the cloud, but
| that comes at a cost (iteration times, price, bandwidth, not
| all flows can be remote). And gaming does too (stadia has mixed
| results- though I am a fan).
|
| I would posit that your workflow has become remote likely
| _because_ of this stagnation.
| blackhaz wrote:
| I'm thinking of upgrading my i7-6600U 1st gen X1 Yoga. I'm
| beginning to feel I need something faster.
| bserge wrote:
| Try undervolting and increasing the TDP with Throttlestop if
| you run Windows and your board allows voltage control.
| darkwater wrote:
| Good for you if you are OK with not owning anything.
| blackearl wrote:
| I guess if you're not gaming on hardware. Although Steam just
| released numbers and their base is bigger than ever, VR went up
| a lot too. Can't do that without newer CPUs. Also means you're
| handcuffed to the internet to do anything.
| freedomben wrote:
| This is absolutely true in my case as well - on the
| desktop/laptop. I use Fedora fwiw also so Windows/macOS slowing
| down over time isn't applicable in my case.
|
| That said, it is definitely not true in the case of server
| hardware.
|
| I have a home lab with a few R620s that have 2014 era Xeons in
| them, and while there are a lot of parallel cores, single core
| performance is abysmal compared to newer in-class hardware. For
| CPU-bound single-threaded tasks, I actually spin up a Linode
| and use that, rather than my on-prem hardware.
|
| I would also note, I have only Intel. I'm going to build an AMD
| rig here within the next few months though because I've had
| numerous people tell me that it's noticeably better.
| whatever1 wrote:
| Your observation holds in desktop. In laptops, the thermals of
| the 14nm generation were horrible, essentially you have to deal
| with a whining fan or cpu throttling, or both. AMD's 4000
| series has much improved upon this, and I assume that the
| latest 10nm Intel will be much better. Performance-wise I agree
| with you. Minor changes, probably more noticeable changes come
| from the massive adoption of fast SSDs (1-2GB/s).
| nomel wrote:
| > Your observation holds in desktop.
|
| > Minor changes
|
| There have been absolutely _massive_ gains in desktop
| performance, if you 're doing CPU bound tasks locally with
| work can be split across cores the high number of cores that
| are now available. The performance for my workloads is about
| 4x what it was, from 7 years ago, for the same price.
| llampx wrote:
| > Is it just me or does it feel like in the past 5-7 years it
| doesn't really make that much of a difference when new CPUs
| come out? My laptop is a i7-4800MQ and it still feels
| incredibly snappy
|
| Your CPU is a 4C/8T 47W one. Not bad for being in a laptop. My
| Thinkpad for example is a 2C/4T 25W one, from the 7xxxU series.
| Which doesn't feel snappy at all.
|
| Your CPU would probably be handily beat by a recent 4-core or
| 6-core Ryzen, and it would be done so while outputting far less
| heat and fan noise.
|
| From geekbench you CPU has: 780 single-core, 2784 multi-core.
| For a 25W Ryzen 5 4500U: 1079 single-core, 4260 multi-core.
| leetcrew wrote:
| if you don't do anything locally that benefits from significant
| compute performance then, yeah, it's gonna look like the market
| is standing still.
|
| in reality, even in intel land much progress has been made in
| single-thread performance and even more for multi-thread.
|
| take a look at these benchmarks comparing a 4770k (4C/8T)
| against a 10700k (8C/16T), both launching at $350:
| https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2659?vs=2664
| dvdkon wrote:
| CPUs have been progressing faster in the last few years, mainly
| because of AMD's Ryzen line. In laptops, 4 cores are now
| standard, and if you can gen one of the AMD 4000U CPUs, 8 cores
| with good single-threaded performance are relatively cheap.
| Same thing on desktop, you can get 20%+ more performance by
| upgrading the CPU.
|
| Sure, it's not the same as 486 vs Pentium, but the Ivy Bridge-
| era CPUs that were used for such a long time are now equivalent
| to low-end CPUs, it's no longer universally better to get an
| old i7 vs a new i5. That said, if you're happy, there's no
| reason to upgrade.
| duffyjp wrote:
| I'm in the process of returning an i3-9100 based Dell
| Precision. It's a true 4 core and despite no hyper-threading
| on the benchmark sites it beats my Haswell Xeon E3 in both
| multi and single threaded tests. In reality however it's a
| dog. It gets bogged down for the lightest workloads.
|
| It's also using MORE electricity from the wall, as the old
| PowerEdge T20 system was an ATX12VO design with a Xeon 1275L.
|
| I'll extend your comment to say that old i7 is universally
| better than new i3 (and I should have known better).
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| SSD performance is quite important for perceived speed.
| fulafel wrote:
| Core count > 2 doesn't help general responsiveness much with
| the current state of software.
| throwawayzRUU6f wrote:
| They've progressed notably in terms of total draw power and
| therefore battery life. Admittedly, not much of a difference
| when it comes to the overall system responsiveness in basic
| user workflows. Quoting from the article:
|
| > Ryzen 7 5800U as its most efficient mobile processor to date,
| citing 21.4 hours battery life on a 53 Wh battery during 1080p
| video playback with Wi-Fi on, or 17.5 hours in MobileMark
| 2018's battery life test
| fctorial wrote:
| > with Wi-Fi on
|
| Does it matter? Doesn't wifi use specialized hardware?
| HelloNurse wrote:
| It's a honest endurance test. Moreover, turning on WiFi
| implies a little CPU activity (some process is going to
| keep an eye on it).
| chrismorgan wrote:
| The AMD Ryzen 7 4800H is around 35% faster than the Intel Core
| i7-4800MQ at single-threaded workloads, up to being about 3x as
| fast when loading all cores (e.g. compiling code). I gather
| that the 5800H should be something like 25% faster again (~19%
| IPC improvement, 5-10% clock speed bump). Compared to the
| i7-4800MQ, that should be up to about 70% faster single-
| threaded, and 4x as fast with all cores loaded.
|
| That's H-class APUs, since you were talking about an Intel MQ.
| The U-class APUs seem to be surprisingly close in performance,
| mostly only 10-20% slower, with a third of the TDP.
| jsight wrote:
| I recently had my work laptop refreshed. The most noticable
| differences are that the new one is thinner, lighter, and has
| better battery life. Performance is roughly comparable and was
| excellent with the 3 year old machine as well.
| kevstev wrote:
| I am still using a SandyBridge core i7 laptop from 2011, and my
| only real gripe with it is its comically large bezel around the
| monitor by today's standards. I can't game with it, but general
| usage and development is not an issue.
|
| I knew I was getting a big architectural jump when I bought the
| Sandybridge, but I wouldn't have believed you if you told me
| that in ten years I would still be happy with its performance
| and still using it.
| neogodless wrote:
| As others pointed out, Zen 2 has upped the game. My Ryzen 7
| 4800H benchmarks very neatly in line with my Ryzen 7 2700X
| desktop (which is Zen+ so half a generation older.) Basically I
| give up very little switching between my desktop and laptop. Up
| until a few years ago I only ever gamed on my desktop but since
| I got this laptop (80W GeForce GTX 1660 Ti) 1080p laptop gaming
| is quite good.
|
| Do you do PC gaming on Stadia or is that all Chromecast+TV type
| gaming? Personally I'm much more of a PC gamer, and while I
| don't have the experience to have an opinion on Stadia, I'm
| currently assuming having good hardware locally is the better
| experience.
| ylere wrote:
| In the posters case, going from their i7-4800mq to a Ryzen
| 5800u, would result in roughly +50% single core performance
| while also doubling the amount of cores, resulting in ~3x the
| performance at 1/3 of the TDP.
| Philip-J-Fry wrote:
| Intel has really been holding a monopoly on CPUs. AMD's YOY
| performance gains in Zen really are exceptional. Their mobile
| processors blow intel out of the water. They are more efficient
| and performant.
|
| I still have a 6700k which is plenty fast enough for anything I
| do. But in reality it's quickly getting outpaced by Zen. The
| only reason Intel has been getting faster in the past few years
| is because of Zen and now Intel is shitting the bed.
|
| The next few years, especially because of Apple Silicon, are
| going to be really interesting for desktop processors. I think
| we're going to see some really crazy innovations.
| bserge wrote:
| No, that's literally been the case with Intel processors.
| Especially mobile ones. There's practically zero difference
| between Haswell and Whiskey Lake (5 years newer) core
| performance. Even Ice Lake was a minor improvement.
|
| But the power consumption has dropped, heat generation has
| dropped (a lot of it because they abandoned FIVR), IGP
| performance has increased and they started supporting DDR4, so
| _overall_ performance has increased.
|
| I personally lament the death of the mobile socket. I hope AMD
| still has socketed mobile processors, but I doubt it. They're
| only useful for people who want to upgrade or fix their laptops
| themselves, people who want to resell their old laptop/parts,
| and the environment.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| Yes, cpu performance no longer increasing by factors of 2 with
| new generations, so a CPU stays relevant for a lot longer,
| unless you have compute heavy jobs that can leverage the new
| core counts. (compilation sometimes fits that description)
| hmottestad wrote:
| It's been quite a few years since we had a 2x improvement
| between generations. I get a feeling it's probably 5-10 years
| ago.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| yes, that is why the person I replied to can have an old
| cpu and it is still fine today.
| nicoburns wrote:
| Anyone multitasking can use the core counts. I feel like 2 ->
| 4 cores will make a difference for most users. 4 -> 8 for
| heavy users like developers.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| Yes, but 4 cores has been the standard for a long time
| already. Recently thanks to AMD heavy users often are
| grabbing 8, 12, 16 or more.
| qayxc wrote:
| You wish! Intel only very recently (e.g. 3 years ago)
| brought 4 cores to mainstream in the mobile segment.
|
| Low power mobile chips were dual core until Q3 2017 when
| Kaby Lake refresh was released and brought 4 cores to the
| i5 and i7 line-up. Even then, entry level and mainstream
| versions (i3 in particular) remained dual core configs.
| nicoburns wrote:
| Only the very top end of laptop CPUs had 4 cores until
| recently. Certainly they weren't mainstream 5-7 years
| ago.
| findthewords wrote:
| I have a cheap Thinkpad E-series from 2012 with Intel
| i7-3612QM 4c/8t CPU. At the time it cost a third less
| than a Macbook. As far as price was concerned it was
| mainstream.
| technofiend wrote:
| I'll be honest - I doubt it qualifies as compute heavy, but
| I'm definitely fantasizing about getting some of these new
| CPUs in a firewall appliance. Some NICs offer various
| offloading options but according to PFSense's website they
| caution users that support is mixed at best. Then there's VPN
| acceleration: there are no AES-NI-like CPU instructions to
| accelerate Wireguard's crypto choices.
|
| Not to mention network speeds even at the consumer end are
| slowly increasing. So having enough beef to push 1 gigabit
| NICs is good but planning for the future and adding 2.5 gb or
| higher is better. And finally having enough compute to layer
| fq_codel or better on top along with some monitoring all adds
| up.
|
| Like a lot of projects the demand will act like a gas and
| fill whatever volume is given to it. Given more compute I'll
| find a way to use it. :-)
| throwawaytolk wrote:
| This is exactly my observation.
|
| I ran a 4700mq from when it came out. I waited to a similar
| processor to come out that was better. took a long while and I
| upgraded to an 8750h because it had more cores and was being
| sold in 500-600$ machines. There is now an 8 core chip of the
| same quality that i the next to most recent intel generation,
| this will be my next upgrade. My 4700mq machine runs win10 and
| ubuntu linux just fine. I dont do heavy compute work on it
| anymore, but I did back when it was current.
| hehehaha wrote:
| Think AMD was too slow to capitalize on Intel's mistakes and
| arrived a year too late. I expect them to lose momentum from here
| on out.
| cbozeman wrote:
| Based on what.
|
| Lay out your case. Anyone can make a "hot take". Not anyone can
| back it up.
| ginko wrote:
| Meanwhile I still have problems getting my hands on a mini-pc
| with a Ryzen 4000 mobile APU.
| slantyyz wrote:
| If you're not dead set on the mobile chip, Lenovo makes a
| ThinkCenter M75q Tiny Gen2 with a Ryzen 4750GE [1], although
| the ship dates look ridiculously far out at 5 weeks or more.
|
| I just ordered the larger SFF model (M75s Gen 2) this week with
| a Ryzen 7 4750G and it is scheduled to arrive within 14d.
|
| MSRP is pricey, but in Canada, I was able to score mine for
| less than half of MSRP due to a sale and some other promos.
|
| [1] https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/desktops-and-all-in-
| ones/thinkc...
| hocuspocus wrote:
| I assume they cannot even supply enough parts to fill the
| demand from laptop OEMs .
|
| I also wish I could replace my desktop PC with an H-class CPU
| setup. The iGPU is enough for my needs, but I could definitely
| use the 8C/16T in a reasonable power envelope. Intel might do
| it, but it's probably be going to be a very expensive NUC
| platform targeted at gamers that also want a dGPU. In the end
| it's cheaper and easier to build a mini-ITX setup using desktop
| parts...
| [deleted]
| ncmncm wrote:
| I am seeing hints that Ryzen 5000 RDRAND is busted again, on e.g.
| systemd and wireguard lists. Is it confusion, or is there really
| a problem?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-15 23:02 UTC)