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
Deicidium369 - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
"Revenues do not lie. " of course they dont, specially when you overcharge for your products"The market says otherwise, they think the products are well priced, and Intel sells all they can make - so just because YOU can't afford them doesn't mean they are over priced - and if they were sooo overpriced, seems like AMD would be in MUCH better financial situation than they are.
Qasar - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
again prove it, look at the 3 links i posted farther up. yea..right well priced, over priced is more like it, Epyc Rome, more cores, it some cases HALF the price, and better performance.schujj07 - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link
Revenue actually does lie. Look at the mid 2000s when the Athlon 64 was king. Intel was still making money hand over fist because of shady business practices. When you are the 800lbs gorilla, you can throw your weight around and make sure that people only buy your product even if it is inferior.alufan - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
lets revisit this comment in 12 months shall we as an example my company has a worldwide base of 60k plus they just moved all future buys to AMD the tide is turning and frankly its about time, intel will return and frankly i hope they do because competition is good for us the consumer but right now face it AMD simply has the better product in all ways maybe apart from one or two specilist benchs or workloads where intel has funded the software development and provided a chip to do the workNamisecond - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
AMD probably does have the "better" product in just about all the fields. But can they step in and significantly eat into Intel's market share? I don't think so. AMD's production capability is currently limited and not in their control.Qasar - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
" But can they step in and significantly eat into Intel's market share? " i think that is slowly starting to happenDeicidium369 - Monday, April 13, 2020 - link
Yup been happening for like 40 years - so far upto mid single digits.. AMD is a 2 trick pony and you almost can't build an AMD laptop/desktop without sending Intel some $$$Qasar - Friday, April 10, 2020 - link
ahh Gondalf, trying anything and everything to try to make your god of cpus look better, huh ? i find it crazy that you just cant except amd has the better product. give it up already, pathetic intel fanboyDeicidium369 - Sunday, April 12, 2020 - link
ahh Qasar, trying anything and everything to try to make your god of cpus look better, huh ? i find it crazy that you just cant except* Intel has the better product. give it up already, pathetic AMD fanboy*accept.
Qasar - Sunday, April 12, 2020 - link
ahh Deicidium369 i find it crazy you are the one that cant except it. amd has the better product now, most reviews have shown that. give it up already, pathetic Intel fanboy