With respect to AMD clients in the mobile world, I always say "With Friends like these who needs Enemies". The most recent example is Microsoft with its Surface AMD edition which is more expensive, less performing, less battery life than the Intel Edition that multiple websites declared on the day Anandtech did the comparison. So let us see if Asus forces the OEMs to give what AMD deserves.
You are acting like AMD's pre-release performance graphs haven't been totally accurate (or close enough to it) since the OG Ryzen launch nearly 3 years ago.... This isn't "hide a 5HP chiller under the table" Intel or "everything we say is mostly a lie" Bulldozer era AMD anymore. This is Lisa Su's AMD in 2020, but it seems your tin foil hat must be just too super precious for you to ignore.
Now I'm mot saying you should put 100% faith in every bench result to be 100% accurate under every usage scenario, but AMD's current track record says ignoring the benches entirely & believing them likely to be fraudulent, just makes you look like a damn fool.
Did you read this? https://www.anandtech.com/show/15213/the-microsoft... This will give you a good idea just how far ahead ice lake is compared to zen+, honestly i don't believe zen2 mobile will be able to catch up to it... sure maybe in cinebench but who uses that on a 15w laptop. Btw i have an r5 3600 so i'm no ones fanboy, just a skeptic of pre-release cherry picked benchmarks.
Yes, but you're COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that Zen+ to Zen 2 is a >=+20% improvement to single-thread performance (+15% IPC & +5% clocks), with an even more massive power saving. So literally the only way for anything you are saying to be even remotely true is if they straight up aren't actually using 7nm Zen 2 as the CPU arch (which is a known quantity) & thus AMD's provided benchmarks are off by orders of magnitude...
AMD used Intel's BEST Ice Lake chip as the comparison for a reason, & as I said above, AMD's pre-release performance graphs have been DEAD ON since the OG Ryzen announcement in late 2016.
Either you are saying that AMD's either blatantly lying about using Zen 2 or they are blatantly lying about their shown performance numbers by a huge margin. So which is it?
What benchmarks do you need to get over yourself? CPU-Z? Geekbench? Because the results would remain very consistent in those as well. And what's your issue with Cinebench other than that it ever so slightly favors AMD chips (as in by a handful of %)? As seen with the desktop CPU's (Ryzen 3000 vs Coffee Lake Refresh) exclusively single-thread performance will only vary by about 5% at the most depending on the particular application/benchmark used to test it. Thus, even by "cherry picking" you'll only be able to change the results by a tiny fraction in either direction.
Also, way to avoid having to try & back up your statement that doubling the core count / multi-threaded performance in the same power/thermal envelope is pointless in a world with 8c/16t consoles dropping in months! You are a delusional Intel fanboy of the worst kind.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
406 Comments
View All Comments
rocketbuddha - Wednesday, January 8, 2020 - link
With respect to AMD clients in the mobile world, I always say "With Friends like these who needs Enemies". The most recent example is Microsoft with its Surface AMD edition which is more expensive, less performing, less battery life than the Intel Edition that multiple websites declared on the day Anandtech did the comparison.So let us see if Asus forces the OEMs to give what AMD deserves.
StevoLincolnite - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
No benchmarks out yet.Take AMD's and Intels "performance" slides with a grain of salt.
Jugotta Bichokink - Tuesday, January 7, 2020 - link
We take Intel fangirls with a grain of Ring-0 speculative access. Blow along now tumbleweed.Obviously you don't get graphs until the machine is built, derp. You may live in fantasy until then!
shabby - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
I can read past cherry picked marketing graphs, thank you very much.Cooe - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
You are acting like AMD's pre-release performance graphs haven't been totally accurate (or close enough to it) since the OG Ryzen launch nearly 3 years ago.... This isn't "hide a 5HP chiller under the table" Intel or "everything we say is mostly a lie" Bulldozer era AMD anymore. This is Lisa Su's AMD in 2020, but it seems your tin foil hat must be just too super precious for you to ignore.Now I'm mot saying you should put 100% faith in every bench result to be 100% accurate under every
usage scenario, but AMD's current track record says ignoring the benches entirely & believing them likely to be fraudulent, just makes you look like a damn fool.
shabby - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
Did you read this? https://www.anandtech.com/show/15213/the-microsoft...This will give you a good idea just how far ahead ice lake is compared to zen+, honestly i don't believe zen2 mobile will be able to catch up to it... sure maybe in cinebench but who uses that on a 15w laptop.
Btw i have an r5 3600 so i'm no ones fanboy, just a skeptic of pre-release cherry picked benchmarks.
Cooe - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
Yes, but you're COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that Zen+ to Zen 2 is a >=+20% improvement to single-thread performance (+15% IPC & +5% clocks), with an even more massive power saving. So literally the only way for anything you are saying to be even remotely true is if they straight up aren't actually using 7nm Zen 2 as the CPU arch (which is a known quantity) & thus AMD's provided benchmarks are off by orders of magnitude...AMD used Intel's BEST Ice Lake chip as the comparison for a reason, & as I said above, AMD's pre-release performance graphs have been DEAD ON since the OG Ryzen announcement in late 2016.
Either you are saying that AMD's either blatantly lying about using Zen 2 or they are blatantly lying about their shown performance numbers by a huge margin. So which is it?
shabby - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
They're cherry picking benchmarks, why can't you understand that. What percentage of people use cinebench? 0.1%Cooe - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
What benchmarks do you need to get over yourself? CPU-Z? Geekbench? Because the results would remain very consistent in those as well. And what's your issue with Cinebench other than that it ever so slightly favors AMD chips (as in by a handful of %)? As seen with the desktop CPU's (Ryzen 3000 vs Coffee Lake Refresh) exclusively single-thread performance will only vary by about 5% at the most depending on the particular application/benchmark used to test it. Thus, even by "cherry picking" you'll only be able to change the results by a tiny fraction in either direction.Also, way to avoid having to try & back up your statement that doubling the core count / multi-threaded performance in the same power/thermal envelope is pointless in a world with 8c/16t consoles dropping in months! You are a delusional Intel fanboy of the worst kind.
shabby - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
Your going to pop vain soon, can't wait...