Testing the Ryzen 9 4900HS Integrated Graphics

Under the hood of the Ryzen 9 4900HS, aside from the eight Zen 2 cores, is an enhanced Vega 8 graphics solution. For this generation of mobile processors, AMD is keeping the top number of compute units to 8, whereas in the previous generation it went up to Vega 11. Just by the name, one would assume that AMD has lowered the performance of the integrated graphics. This is not the case.

For the new Ryzen Mobile 4000 processors, the Vega graphics here are enhanced in three main ways over the previous generation. First is that it is built on the 7nm process node, and AMD put a lot of effort into physical design, allowing for a more optimized version that has a wider voltage/frequency window compared to the previous generation. Secondly, and somewhat connected, is the frequency: the new processors top out at 1750 MHz, rather than 1400 MHz, which would naturally give a simple 25 % boost with all other things being equal. Third on the list is memory, as the new platform supports up to DDR4-3200, rather than DDR4-2400, providing an immediate bandwidth boost which is what integrated graphics loves. There’s also the nature of the CPU cores themselves, having larger L3 caches, which often improves integrated graphics workloads that interact a lot with the CPU.

Normally, with the ASUS Zephryus G14, the switching between the integrated graphics and the discrete graphics should be automatic. There is a setting in the NVIDIA Control Panel to let the system auto-switch between integrated and discrete, and we would expect the system to be on the IGP when off the wall power, but on the discrete card when gaming (note, we had issues in our battery life test where the discrete card was on, but ASUS couldn’t reproduce the issue). In order to force the integrated graphics for our testing, because the NVIDIA Control Panel didn’t seem to catch all of our tests to force them onto the integrated graphics, we went into the device manager and actually disabled the NVIDIA graphics.

This left us with AMD’s best integrated graphics in its Ryzen Mobile 4000 series: 1750 MHz of enhanced Vega 8 running at DDR4-3200.


Renoir with Vega 8 – updated to 20.4 after this screenshot was taken

Our comparison point here is actually a fairly tricky one to set up. Unfortunately we do not have a Ryzen 7 3750H from the previous generation for comparison, but we do have an Honor Magicbook 14, which has a Ryzen 5 3500U.


Picasso with Vega 8

This is a 15 W processor, running at 1200 MHz and DDR4-2400, which again makes the comparison a little tricky, but it is better than comparing it to the Intel HD630 graphics in the Razer Blade.

We also re-ran the benchmarks on the latest drivers with AMD's 65 Desktop APUs, the Ryzen 5 3400G (with Vega11) and the Ryzen 3 3200G (with Vega 8). These are running at DDR4-2933, the AMD maximum officially supported by these APUs (which means anything above this is overclocking). 

Civilization 6 (1080p Max, No MSAA)Civilization 6 (1080p Max, 8x MSAA)

This is a pretty substantial difference, no joke.

Borderlands 3 (1080p Medium)Final Fantasy XV (1080p Standard)Counter Strike Source (1080p Max)

Hopefully we will get more variants of the Ryzen integrated graphics to test, along with an Ice Lake system.

ASUS Zephyrus G14 (Ryzen 9) vs Razer Blade (Core i7): Low Power Performance Testing the Ryzen 9 4900HS with DDR4-2666 and DDR4-3000
POST A COMMENT

264 Comments

View All Comments

  • Namisecond - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link

    Like your article link says, that's more likely to hurt TSMC and it's western customers like AMD, Nvidia and Apple more than it will Huawei. At this point, I don't think it's going to happen. Even if it does, it won't affect contracts already in place and products already in production. Remember, 18 month lead time. Reply
  • JayNor - Sunday, April 12, 2020 - link

    this is partially an Intel product, and they thank you.

    " a 1 TB Intel 660p NVMe SSD, and an Intel Wi-Fi 6 solution."
    Reply
  • dguy6789 - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link

    What do you mean? Intel's 9900K is faster than anything AMD has in gaming including AMD's 4 grand CPU. And that is just 14nm vs 7nm.

    AMD won't have a better gaming CPU than the 9900K 2 years from now.
    Reply
  • Qasar - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link

    and the 9900k only has the performance lead for one reason, clock speed, which is the only reason intel has any performance lead right now, while using more power to get that performance. clock the cpus at the same speed, and see what happens. Reply
  • schujj07 - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link

    Outside of gaming, the 3700X performs as good or better than the 9900k more often than not, all while the 9900k draws a massive 60% more power. In gaming benchmarks the 9900k is ahead by about 5% at 1080p using a 2080Ti. At that point it is the difference between 300fps & 315fps. No way that you or I will ever be able to tell the difference. Reply
  • schujj07 - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link

    Edit: The 9900k has a 3.6GHz base and 5GHz boost clock. 3700X has 3.6GHz base and 4.4GHz boost. Even with a 13.5% higher boost clock, see typically in single threaded applications, the 9900k is only barely able to beat out the 3700X in some single threaded applications. Difference is usually 3% on average. Normalized for clock speed Zen 2 has about an 8% IPC advantage over Sky Lake and its derivatives. Reply
  • marrakech - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    https://www.dell.com/en-nz/work/shop/workstations/...
    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-...
    Reply
  • marrakech - Sunday, November 8, 2020 - link

    nice prediction ,
    just as an information i seen some dude soend 6000 $ for an intel xeon w workstation the best 8 core mobile intel and its still slower then my 4800H cpu
    total cost of laptop after ram upgrade 1180$
    Reply
  • Gondalf - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link

    I find crazy to compare an 8 core Laptop to a 6 core one.
    Intel is plenty of 45W 8 cores SKUs for laptops with turbos at over 5Ghz, and we are here to show nothing.
    So basically AMD can only compete with a 6 core Coffee lake???
    Reply
  • Irata - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link

    There are reviews that show the eight core can‘t keep up either or just barely and that is in a huge and heavy chassis (i.e. the portable desktop type). And their battery life is even worse, as is their power consumption.

    Oh, and looking at this review, the six core is coupled with a faster RTX 2060 GPU...
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now