Maybe. He has a desktop for gaming and will get my 1080 Ti later this year when I upgrade. If he needs a laptop "for school" then a AUD400 one should do. He is paying for it himself so can do whatever he wants with his money. I am trying to encourage wise spending but am also well aware of all the excellent purchasing decisions I made at 16 . While that laptop is super nice, I think that waiting to see a bit more of the offerings in a new group of products might be better than jumping but looking can't hurt.
Bunch of U models launched /launching too for the 'rest of us' so that will be interesting. That zephyr is excellent though. It represents a truely pivotal moment re' AMD powered laptops that's for sure. Launching with a halo gaming / higher power product a good move from a marketing pt of view too I think. It's grabbed a shitload of attention from sheer performance alone
saw this on reddit and though it was worth sharing Zen2 Mobile in one picture https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/fs3u8w/zen2_mobile_in_one_picture/
That's a little misleading. 9980HK is designed as a 45W chip but some laptops implement a 90W "Turbo" mode. Spoilers: Performance doesn't double when going from the 45W mode to the 90W mode, it's more like a 20% improvement with lousy efficiency. The AMD chip would still be the clear winner when compared to the 9980HK in 45W mode (25% faster in Cinebench for around the same power consumption) but the Intel isn't AS bad as that makes it look.
Griffin platform was the first mobile only one. circa 2008. They wern't terrible as a platform, split power plane, better power management, battery life improved, but ended up facing off with 45nm - no hope given they were still on K8 Architecture a terrible 65nm! Yeah, watt/performance vs perf/watt, are two difference things.. still, it's usually more complicated than that still - just about all will allow temporary boost above TDP for short duration, For the 4900HS that ceiling is 65w , for the 9980HK it's 91w (or is it ~100?) though smaller chassis might not allow the later (for any period of time) Theres no clear way to compare laptop processors installed in a system. All you can do is look at sustained power draw vs performance. When it comes to cinebench I think you'll find the perf/watt delta would be larger than 25% , 30%+. quite a slaughtering
So I got sent this very interesting link for a laptop using desktop Ryzen 3000 CPU's: https://www.xmg.gg/en/en/xmg-apex-15 So down the bottom it says the cpu "max" option is 3900X at 65W, which implies they are running the cpu in eco mode. So I went looking up some benchmark stats, to compare to the 4900HS results. The 4900HS (35W) gets ~4100 in cinebench R20, whereas a stock 3700X gets ~4800, and I found a reddit post stating a 3700X in eco mode (45W) gets ~4300. The same post also said the single core score stayed the same, eco vs normal mode. The L3 cache might be responsible for the performance difference: 12MB in 4900HS vs 32MB in 3900X. So this laptop seems a way better option. Having a GPU integrated on the 4900HS is pretty moot point considering the benchmarked laptop linked in this thread uses a discrete graphics card.
Some more Zen3 leaks this time from adored: Quick notes (A lot of these have been previous rumours, but more concrete now possibly) Only expect 10-15% single threaded IPC gains this time. 8 core ccx instead of 4. This may increase multithreaded IPC above the 10-15% because L3 cache is shared between all 8 cores instead of 4. higher boost clocks (duh) B0 sampling not expected until September, so 2020 release looking unlikely
Intel's 10nm is broken and has been broken for some time. When they actually ship something in meaningful volume, sure they will provide competition. Until then, they're treading water.
^ from the wcf article enhanced security ? maybe intel go with just fixing the current shitfest first
AMD Zen 3 ‘Ryzen 4000 And EPYC Milan’ CPU Rumors: Up To 15% IPC Increase, Larger L3 Cache Available Per CCX - https://wccftech.com/amd-zen-3-ryzen-4000-epyc-milan-cpu-ipc-cache-architecture-rumor/ Ryzen 4000(with higher clock speeds & upto 15?% IPC increase) should easily outperform soon to be released Intel i9 10900K(probably not any faster than 9900K) in games too i think..
15+ IPC and still much lower thermals. 50% FPU seems unbelievable unless they are talking about more cores or specific instructions.
