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 ESTCPU Benchmarks
Comparison of these two CPUs is going to be interesting. Both laptops being tested excel in different ways:
| ASUS Zephyrus G14 vs Razer Blade 15 | ||
| ASUS Zephyrus G14 |
AnandTech | Razer Blade 15-inch |
| Ryzen 9 4900HS | CPU | Core i7-9750H |
| 8 / 16 | Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 |
| 1400 MHz | Idle Frequency | 1100 MHz |
| 3000 MHz | Base Frequency | 2600 MHz |
| 4300 MHz | Rated 1T Turbo | 4500 MHz |
| 4500 MHz | Measured 1T Turbo | 4200 MHz |
| 35 W | TDP Listed | 45 W |
| - | TDP Measured | 35 W |
| - | PL2 Listed | 60 W |
| - | PL2 Measured | 45 W |
| 16 GB DDR4-3200 22-22-22 1T |
DRAM | 16 GB DDR4-2666 19-19-19 2T |
The ASUS device has more cores, and by the looks of our testing, actually turbos to a higher frequency, regardless of the sticker on the box. We’ve already shown that AMD’s Zen 2 can have comparable if not better IPC than Intel’s Coffee Lake refresh, so add that to the more cores, should put every test in AMD’s camp.
What should benefit Intel here is the on-box TDP, of 45 W, compared to the AMD 35 W. When we fired up our usual program for monitoring Intel frequencies, it showed that there is a hard coded BIOS boost up to 60 W, which we thought should give some extra power. However, when the system was actually set to a workload, the peak turbo power was only 45 W, which the system was able to keep for 10-15 seconds. Then it sat back at 35 W, which makes it in line with AMD. This is odd performance from the Intel CPU, however we assume at this level that Razer has made the decisions in order to fit within the thermal profile of the Blade 15 chassis.
If Intel has a lower frequency, fewer cores, and a lower frequency, all for the same power envelope as AMD, then it looks like a slam dunk for AMD.
It is. These systems are built with productivity in mind, and even with benchmarks that are bursty like PCMark, AMD takes the win.
I also took some time to run the Civ 6 AI benchmarks, which performs 10 turns of a late game and averages the turn time. Intel won this test, but I performed it again with the power unplugged and on battery saver mode in Windows. The results were reversed:
This led me to do some more tests without power connected. I’ve separated these out into a different page, combining some CPU and some GPU data.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
267 Comments
View All Comments
Kishoreshack - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
@ian cuttresWhy soo harsh on AMD?
Its outdoing intel processor which draw 2 or 3 times more power
It literally smokes any Intel processor in the same power envelope
You should be giving praises & awards to AMD
instead the tone of article doesn't do justice to AMD
Deicidium369 - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
Facts hurt, huh? It's impressive but not life altering. What sort of awards? "Award for not going bankrupt" or "Award for FINALLY putting something worth purchasing" or "Award because you hut AMD's fee fees"The tone is fair, Ian is a skilled writer and reviewer - I never felt he has leaned more to one side or the other.
destorofall - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link
can I give intel an award for "masterfully delaying a node ramp-up for almost half a decade."Korguz - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link
they didnt delaying, they screwed up some how, some say intel was too aggressive on what it was trying to do with it, and it didnt workWineohe - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
This does potentially offer OEMs some breathing room with features, if the CPU and Chipset can lower their costs by a few hundred dollars. They can offer a Notebook with similar or better performance and battery life, with more features. Say a 1TB SSD versus a 512GB, 32GB vs 16GB, better display, or better dedicated GPU. This would easily sway me as a consumer toward the AMD option.Deicidium369 - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
Nope. Most people would still buy Intel - price isn't most people's primary metric - some buy Intel because why buy something that is "like Intel" when you can, you know, "Buy Intel". OEMs build what people want - and this new CPU will be a major rarity - and will not sell in even large numbers by AMDs standards.Qasar - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
" OEMs build what people want " or buy intel because intel bribes or threatens them, remember the athlon 64 days ? guess what, intel got taken to court over their shady dealings, and they lost, but i know you won't remember that, because your an intel fanboy, and intel cant do anything wrong.watzupken - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
Its true that most consumers will still prefer Intel chips due to the reputation they have build for themselves over the years. However in this age where people can find information readily, that advantage may not be firm. With more enthusiasts leaning towards AMD, this may also filter down to those who are not tech savvy through positive word of mouth. For example, it is not uncommon for someone who is not tech savvy to get recommendation from a technology savvy person when buying a computer/ laptop. Moreover, AMD is very aggressive when it comes to the cost of the chips, further adding another carrot to consumers to switch camp. One other key problem was poorer battery life on AMD mobile chips, i.e. Ryzen 2xxx and 3xxx for mobile devices, which is no longer the case here unless the manufacturers deliberately gimp the battery capacity.sleeperclass - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
No webcam is a big blow. In these times, where everyone is using online chat platforms for communicating such as Teams, Zoom ,etc, this is something that should have just been there.All said and done, good progress by AMD in the mobile cpu space.
Qasar - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
both of the notebooks i have, have webcams, both are unplugged and i picked up a logitech C920 i think it is, just didnt like the idea of having to tilt the screen so the person i was talking to could see me better, the separate webcam, allows that no matter how the screen is tilted. but to each his own :-)