AMD’s Mobile Revival: Redefining the Notebook Business with the Ryzen 9 4900HS (A Review)
by Dr. Ian Cutress on April 9, 2020 9:00 AM ESTLow Power Performance
Truth be told, I didn’t go into this review with low power testing in mind. These sorts of laptops, while capable of driving high performance on the go, are essentially expected to be connected to the power socket when performance is needed. Even the best ultraportables struggle for battery life when everything is whirring at full tilt. Nonetheless, after my own experiences of 3 hours of gaming on power with a Matebook X Pro and a high screen brightness, it is a genuine use case.
For these tests, the settings and software are the same as normal, but the only change is that the power cable has been removed and the power setting in Windows has been moved to ‘Best Battery Life’. We’re still in the Recommended Power Plan and not the Battery Saver Plan. What this does is force the OS and system to manage its power appropriately between CPU and GPU. In these circumstances being able to distribute the power where it is needed most can be a very critical factor in getting a project finished, or having a game that is playable.
Our tests here, due to time, are the following:
- Civilization 6, 1080p MSAA 8x, AI Test (On Battery, Battery Saver)
- Borderlands 3, 1080p Medium (On Battery, Battery Saver)
- Counter Strike Source, 1080p Max (On Battery, Battery Saver)
So previously Intel had a very slight advantage in AI turn time here, but as we move to a power limited scenario, AMD takes a more substantial lead – over 10%.
Where we had a small 5% win for AMD in the full power scenario, the gap is a bit bigger percentage wise for AMD in the low power scenario. It is still under 30 FPS, which is probably unplayable for BL3.
Now CSS is a little odd. When I’m in Battery Saver mode but plugged in, I get the full power FPS value. But the minute I take it out, on the Razer Blade, something goes a bit mental and we end up being limited to 60 FPS. V-Sync is disabled in every setting I think of, and yet there doesn’t seem to be a way of getting off of 60 FPS.
Ultimately in every scenario, in a few small tests, where Intel might have been ahead on wall power, AMD pulls ahead on limited power.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
267 Comments
View All Comments
twtech - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
That picture really illustrates just how gigantic the 64 core TR/Epyc really is.Keyboard1701 - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
Going by the performance of the laptops on battery, I'm curious to see if something like a gtx 1650 might actually perform better than a rtx 2060 on battery.Keyboard1701 - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
I apologise for the double post, but I've also observed that the iGPU actually performs just as well as the rtx 2060 when the laptop is running on battery. Would this mean that the discrete gpu is redundant for someone who mainly intends to use the laptop on battery power?RollingCamel - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
Did you run any thermal analysis on the laptop?DanNeely - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
IF you do any more tests on this, I'd be interested in seeing how gaming performance is affected by using a 65W USB-C charger instead of the 180W barrel one. The smaller charger would be nice while traveling; but the only time I'd be gaming on a laptop is when I'm away and don't have access to my desktop.willgart - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
the performance gain by changing the RAM is incredible.DiHydro - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
Thank you taking the time to look at and comment on the thickness, and how it allows a bigger battery in the same footprint. I have been saying for the past couple years how the race for the thinnest laptop is pretty futile when OEMs keep putting higher wattage parts in them.velatra - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
There's a problematic sentence in the second paragraph of the "2016: A Historic Low for AMD in Notebooks" section of the first page. It reads "OEMs knew this crippled performance, but in enabled the headline processors...." Perhaps "in" should be "it."Techie2 - Saturday, April 11, 2020 - link
Nice to see AMD continuing to lead in performance. One thing that makes no sense to me is pricing on laptops. I just don't see the basis for >$1000. laptops. It's not like the hardware cost can justify the retail prices. It's more like collusion by laptop makers IMO. I guess when they finally saturate the laptop market prices will come down to reality.watzupken - Saturday, April 11, 2020 - link
AT has done a great job with this review. Where I think AT did a lot better than the rest of the reviewers (besides the usual technical analysis), is that you nailed the issue with the short battery life that left many perplexed since some review sites are getting 10+ hours of battery, while some are getting 4+. I think its a good testament of the knowledge of the reviewers here. Thank you AT.