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
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 :-)