Likely you mean 25 W?? i think yes. I don't see competition here, simply 8 cores do not fit in 15 W at these clock speed. In fact they say "up to" about clock speeds, turbo included. My bet, we will never see a 8 core Ryzen Mobile 4000 in a thin laptop. In fact what announced right now is of 25 W class. The funny thing AMD have not a fast clocked 4 cores 8 threads, a pretty suicidal thing in mobile.
The 8 Core is a 15W chip @1.8Ghz with 4.2Ghz Turbo. Of course it won't be 15W Turbo but its worse for Intel, just like their 300W 4 Cores desktop CPUs, the 9900KS will use up to 280W under Turbo, 350W when overclocked which is just insane. The 6 Core from AMD is 2.1Ghz @15W with a Turbo boost of 4Ghz.
Intel Turbo boost is throttled to 4Ghz instead of the advertised 4.5Ghz. Tomshardware forums are flooded with Intel throttling issues on mobile. If AMD really reaches 4.2Ghz Turbo then it will be faster in ST than the best Intel mobile CPU and waay faster in MT.
I think better strategy is to lower as they can the SOC die size, crank up seriously the clock speed and try to grab more and more market share from Intel in a situation of tight 7nm supply. This one is the wrong SOC for AMD needs in actual timeframe.
1) The SoC die size is pretty small already. 80+% yields will do fine. 2) The clock speed won't go higher without a different process or a different architecture. They're not in a position to radically change either. 3) I trust their perspective on what SoC they need better than yours.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
406 Comments
View All Comments
wilsonkf - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
I would safely bet AMD laptop won't have thunderbolt ports if I were an Intel fanboy.Hul8 - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
Well obviously since "Thunderbolt" is an Intel trademark - no one else can use the name.There are *compatible* solutions available for Ryzen, though, like this Gigabyte one:
"Threadripper: Perfect Thunderbolt Compatibility on the Designare TRX40 Tested"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59svND1ZtXI
a YouTube video by Level1Techs, 2019-12-24.
Alistair - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
AMD just announced a 2.1Ghz 6 core 15W laptop CPU to compete against Intel's 1.1Ghz laptop CPU. This is a big deal.Gondalf - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
Likely you mean 25 W?? i think yes. I don't see competition here, simply 8 cores do not fit in 15 W at these clock speed. In fact they say "up to" about clock speeds, turbo included.My bet, we will never see a 8 core Ryzen Mobile 4000 in a thin laptop. In fact what announced right now is of 25 W class.
The funny thing AMD have not a fast clocked 4 cores 8 threads, a pretty suicidal thing in mobile.
Holliday75 - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
You keep this up we are going to have to take you to the vet and put you down.Zizo007 - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
The 8 Core is a 15W chip @1.8Ghz with 4.2Ghz Turbo. Of course it won't be 15W Turbo but its worse for Intel, just like their 300W 4 Cores desktop CPUs, the 9900KS will use up to 280W under Turbo, 350W when overclocked which is just insane. The 6 Core from AMD is 2.1Ghz @15W with a Turbo boost of 4Ghz.Intel Turbo boost is throttled to 4Ghz instead of the advertised 4.5Ghz. Tomshardware forums are flooded with Intel throttling issues on mobile. If AMD really reaches 4.2Ghz Turbo then it will be faster in ST than the best Intel mobile CPU and waay faster in MT.
Zizo007 - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
AMD made 8 Core thin laptops a reality with decent performance.Gondalf - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
I think better strategy is to lower as they can the SOC die size, crank up seriously the clock speed and try to grab more and more market share from Intel in a situation of tight 7nm supply.This one is the wrong SOC for AMD needs in actual timeframe.
Korguz - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
new flash gondalf.. intels 10nm chips are in even shorter supply.. cant go above 4 cores.. and are clocked lower then their 14nm counterparts..cant handle your beloved intel loosing on practically all front can you ? keep trying to spread more bs you dont have a chance of proving..
Spunjji - Monday, January 13, 2020 - link
1) The SoC die size is pretty small already. 80+% yields will do fine.2) The clock speed won't go higher without a different process or a different architecture. They're not in a position to radically change either.
3) I trust their perspective on what SoC they need better than yours.