amd mobile processor line. Comparison of laptop processors (AMD and Intel). New Ryzen laptops
Sergey Pakhomov
Sales of laptops have long surpassed sales of desktop PCs, and today most home users rely on laptops. The retail network offers a huge variety of laptop models on both Intel and AMD platforms. On the one hand, such abundance pleases the eye, but on the other, the problem of choice arises. As you know, the performance of a computer is largely determined by the processor installed in it, but understanding modern families and symbols processors are not so easy. And if everything is more or less clear with the designations of Intel’s mobile processors, then AMD has complete confusion with this. Actually, it was precisely this circumstance that prompted us to compile a kind of guide to mobile processors from AMD.
The range of AMD processors for laptops is more than diverse (see table). However, if we talk about modern processors, which makes sense to focus on, then we can limit ourselves to considering only 45-nm processors of the Phenom II, Athlon II, Turion II, V-series, Sempron families with the following core code names: Champlain, Geneva and Caspian.
Processors codenamed Champlain were announced by the company quite recently - in May 2010, while 45 nm processors codenamed Caspian were announced in September 2009.
The AMD family of mobile processors includes both quad-core and triple-, dual- and single-core models.
Each processor core has a 128 KB Level 1 (L1) cache, which is divided into a dual-channel 64 KB data cache and a dual-channel 64 KB instruction cache. In addition, each processor core has a dedicated L2 cache of 512 KB or 1 MB.
But AMD mobile processors do not have third-level cache memory (L3) (unlike their desktop counterparts).
All AMD mobile processors have AMD technology 64 (supports 64-bit computing). In addition, all AMD processors are equipped with MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3 and Extended 3DNow! instruction sets, Cool'n'Quiet power saving technologies, NX Bit virus protection and AMD Virtualization technology.
So, let's look at the families of modern AMD mobile processors in more detail. And we will begin, naturally, by considering the AMD Phenom II family of quad-core processors.
AMD's mobile quad-core processor family is the 900 series of Phenom II processors.
All Phenom II 900 series processors have a 2 MB L2 cache (512 KB per processor core) and an integrated DDR3 memory controller. Additionally, all of these processors use 128-bit FPUs. The differences between the quad-core Phenom II 900 series processors include clock speed, power consumption, and supported memory. For its processors, AMD indicates another rather strange and, in our opinion, completely illogical characteristic - Maximum processor-to-system bandwidth (MAX CPU BW). We are talking about the total bandwidth of all buses between the processor and the system, or more precisely, the total bandwidth of the HyperTransport (HT) bus and the memory bus. If, for example, the processor works with DDR3-1333 memory, then throughput memory bus is 21.2 GB/s (in dual-channel mode). Further, if the HyperTransport (HT) bus throughput is 3600 GT/s, which corresponds to a throughput of 14.4 GB/s, then the total throughput of the HyperTransport bus and the memory bus will be 35.7 GB/s. Of course, it would be more logical to indicate in the processor specification the maximum memory frequency that the processor supports, but... it is what it is. Fortunately, knowledge of the HyperTransport bus bandwidth and such a parameter as MAX CPU BW allows you to unambiguously determine the maximum memory frequency supported by the processor.
So, let's return to the family of quad-core Phenom II 900 series processors. This family is headed by the Phenom II X920 Black Edition (BE) with unlocked multiplier. This processor has the highest clock speed (2.3 GHz) in the AMD family of quad-core mobile processors and is the hottest - its power consumption is 45 W. The HyperTransport bus bandwidth is 3600 GT/s, and the MAX CPU BW parameter value is 35.7 GB/s. As you can easily calculate, this means that the built-in DDR3 memory controller supports memory with a maximum frequency of 1333 MHz (in dual-channel operating mode).
Two more models of AMD quad-core mobile processors are the Phenom II N930 and Phenom II P920. The Phenom II N930 has a clock speed of 2 GHz and a power consumption of 35 W, while the Phenom II P920 has a clock speed of 1.6 GHz and a power consumption of 25 W. For both processor models, the HyperTransport bus bandwidth is 3600 GT/s, but the Phenom II N930 processor supports DDR3-1333 memory, and the Phenom II P920 processor only supports DDR3-1066 memory.
AMD's tri-core mobile processor family is the 800 series of Phenom II processors. Today there are only two three-core models of mobile processors: Phenom II N830 and Phenom II P820, both equipped with a 1536 KB L2 cache (512 KB for each processor core) and an integrated DDR3 memory controller. The difference between these models is the clock speed, power consumption and the maximum frequency of supported DDR3 memory. Thus, the Phenom II N830 processor operates at a clock frequency of 2.1 GHz with a power consumption of 35 W, and the maximum frequency of DDR3 memory supported by the processor is 1333 MHz. The Phenom II P820 processor operates at a clock speed of 1.8 GHz with a power consumption of 25 W and supports DDR3-1066 memory.
In passing, we note that if the letter “P” is present in the marking of AMD processors, this means that the processor’s power consumption is 25 W. The presence of the letter “N” indicates a processor power consumption of 35 W, and the letter “X” indicates 45 W.
The Phenom II family of dual-core processors is the 600 series. This series today includes two models: Phenom II X620 BE and Phenom II N620. Both of them have a 2 MB L2 cache (1 MB per core) and 3600 GT/s HT bus bandwidth. Moreover, both processor models support DDR3-1333 memory (MAX CPU BW is 35.7 GB/s). The difference between the processors is that the Phenom II X620 BE model has a power consumption of 45 W and a clock speed of 3.1 GHz. In addition, this processor has an unlocked multiplier. The 35W Phenom II N620 processor has clock frequency at 2.8 GHz.
Concluding the review of mobile processors of the Phenom II family, we note once again that it includes four, triple and dual-core processors with a 128-bit FPU, the power consumption of which can be 45, 35 or 25 W. All of these processors have HT 3600 GT/s bus bandwidth and support DDR3 memory with a maximum frequency of 1333 or 1066 MHz. The size of the L2 cache depends on the number of processor cores and per one processor core is 512 KB (for four and three-core models) or 1 MB (for dual-core models).
The next family of 45nm mobile processors based on the Champlain core is the Turion II family of dual-core processors, which is represented by two models: Turion II N530 and Turion II P520. These processors differ from each other only in clock speed and power consumption. The Turion II N530 has a clock speed of 2.5 GHz and a power consumption of 35 W, while the Turion II P520 has a clock speed of 2.3 GHz and a power consumption of 25 W. In all other respects, the characteristics of these processors are the same. Thus, both models are equipped with 128-bit FPUs, have a 2 MB L2 cache (1 MB per core), and the HT bus bandwidth is 3600 GT/s. In addition, both processor models support DDR3-1066 memory. Note that the dual-core processors of the Turion II 500 series family are practically no different in their characteristics from the dual-core models of the Phenom II 600 series processors. The differences are only in the clock speed and the maximum frequency of supported memory. Actually, it’s not very clear why these two processor models needed to be separated into a separate Turion II family, because they could be classified as part of the Phenom II family of dual-core processors.
The next family of AMD dual-core mobile processors based on the Champlain core is the Athlon II family, which is also represented by two models: Athlon II N330 and Athlon II P320. These processors are really very different from the dual-core Phenom II and Turion II processors. First of all, their L2 cache is reduced to 1 MB (512 KB per core). In addition, these processors have 64-bit FPUs and an HT bus bandwidth of 3200 GT/s. In addition, these processors only support DDR3-1066 memory. The differences between the Athlon II N330 and Athlon II P320 models themselves are in clock speed and power consumption.
Single-core mobile processors based on the Champlain core are represented by the V-Series family, which today includes only one model - the V120 with a clock frequency of 2.2 GHz and a 512 KB L2 cache. This processor is equipped with 64-bit FPUs, and the HT bus bandwidth is 3200 GT/s. In addition, the V120 processor supports DDR3-1066 memory and its power consumption is 25 W. In general, according to its characteristics, the V120 processor is a single-core version of the Athlon II P320 processor.
All AMD mobile processors we reviewed are 2010 processors (they were announced by the company in May), aimed at productive and universal laptops, as well as entry-level laptops. However, AMD's product range also includes processors with reduced power consumption - they are aimed at ultra-thin laptops and netbooks. These dual-core and single-core 45nm processors, also announced in May, are codenamed Geneva and include the Turion II Neo, Athlon II Neo and V-Series
Dual-core processors of the Turion II Neo series (Turion II Neo K665, Turion II Neo K625) have a power consumption of 15 W, dual-core and single-core processors of the Athlon II Neo series (Athlon II Neo K325, Athlon II Neo K125) have a power consumption of 12 W, but the power consumption of a single-core The V105 processor is only 9 Watts.
The Turion II Neo series dual-core processors feature 128-bit FPUs and 2 MB L2 cache (1 MB per core). The HT bus capacity is 3200 GT/s.
Athlon II Neo series processors have 64-bit FPUs and 1 MB L2 cache per core, and HT bus bandwidth is 2000 GT/s. Well, the single-core V105 processor differs (except for the clock frequency) from the single-core Athlon II Neo K125 processor in that the L2 cache is halved.
Note that all Geneva processors support DDR3-1066 memory in dual-channel mode.
In addition to the Champlain and Geneva mobile processors, AMD's product range also includes other 45 nm mobile processors. We are talking about processors codenamed Caspian, which were announced in September 2009 and are not yet outdated. Mobile processors Caspian is represented by the Turion II and Turion II Ultra dual-core processor families, the Athlon II dual-core processor family, and the Sempron single-core processor family.
All dual-core Caspian processors have a power consumption of 35 W, and single-core processors have a power consumption of 25 W. In addition, all Caspian processors only support DDR2-800 memory (in dual-channel operating mode).
The Turion II and Turion II Ultra processor families feature 128-bit FPUs and HT bus bandwidth of 3600 GT/s. The difference between the Turion II Ultra and Turion II family of processors is that the Turion II Ultra processors have a 2 MB L2 cache (1 MB per core), while the Turion II processors have a 1 MB L2 cache (512 KB per core).
Processors of the Athlon II and Sempron families have 64-bit FPUs and 512 KB L2 cache per core. In addition, the HT bus bandwidth for these processors is 3200 GT/s.
This article will compare laptop processors from two leading semiconductor manufacturers - Intel and AMD. The products of the first of them are equipped with an improved processor part and have more high level speed. In turn, AMD solutions boast a more powerful graphics subsystem.
Division into niches
Comparison and Intel for laptops would be best done in three niches:
- Budget-class processors (they are also the most affordable).
- Mid-level CPUs that combine both high speed and acceptable energy efficiency.
- Chips with maximum performance levels. In this case, performance, autonomy and energy efficiency fade into the background.
If in the first two cases AMD can provide a worthy alternative to Intel, then the latter company has reigned supreme in the premium segment for quite some time. The only hope in this regard is new processor solutions based on the Zen architecture, which AMD should present next year.
Entry-level Intel products
Until recently, this niche from Intel was occupied by products from the Atom line. But now the situation has changed and entry-level laptops are now based on processors The most modest products of this class include only 2 cores, and the most advanced ones - 4. The following models are relevant for the 3rd quarter of 2016, which are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 - Current CPU models from Intel for entry-level mobile PCs.
Model name | Number of cores, pcs | Technical process, nm | Level 3 cache, MB | Frequencies, GHz | Thermal package, W | CPU cost, $ | HD Graphics video card model |
|
There are essentially no fundamental differences between these CPU models. They are aimed at solving the simplest problems and have a minimum level of performance. Also, this manufacturer of semiconductor solutions has a strong point in the processor part, but the integrated graphics subsystem is very weak. Another one strong point of these products is a high degree of energy efficiency and thereby improved autonomy.
Mid-range solutions from Intel
Core i3 and Core i5 are mid-range Intel processors for laptops. A comparison of their characteristics indicates that the first family is closer to entry-level solutions, and the second, under certain circumstances, can compete with the most productive chips of this company. Detailed specifications of this product family are given in Table 2.
Table 2 - Parameters of Intel processors for mid-range laptops.
Model name | Number of Cores/ logical flows, pcs. | Production technology, nm | Level 3 cache, MB | Frequencies, GHz | Power, W | Video card HD Graphics |
|
The characteristics of CPUs of this class are almost identical. The key difference is the improved energy saving of the 7U54. As a result, autonomy in this case will also be better. Otherwise, there are no significant differences between these processors. The price for all chips of this family is the same - $281.
Premium processors for laptops from Intel
For the latest generation laptops, this indicates that the most powerful solutions include i7 family CPUs. Moreover, in architectural terms, they are practically no different from middle-class products. Even the video card models in this case are the same. But a higher level of performance compared to mid-range processors is provided by higher clock speeds and an increased size of Level 3 volatile memory. The main parameters of chips of this family are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 - Main characteristics of i7 family CPUs.
The difference between these products is that in the second case, energy efficiency is improved, but the performance will ultimately be lower.
AMD entry-level mobile processors
For laptops from the two leading manufacturers of these products, it indicates that Intel, as noted earlier, has a better processor part, and AMD has an integrated graphics subsystem. If the priority in a new laptop is an improved video system, then it is better to pay attention to laptops from a second manufacturer. Specific chip models with technical specifications are given in Table 4.
Table 4 - The latest AMD processors for entry-level laptops.
Model name | Frequency range, GHz | Level 2 cache, MB | Thermal package, W | Number of cores, pcs | Integrated Graphics |
|
For the most part, these chips have almost identical technical specifications. The key difference here is only in the frequency range and the model of the integrated built-in accelerator. It is based on these parameters that you need to make a choice. If you need maximum autonomy, then we choose products with lower performance. If autonomy comes to the fore, then you will have to sacrifice dynamism for this.
AMD chips for organizing mid-range laptops
FX-9XXXP and A1X-9XXXP are for laptops. Comparison of their characteristics with entry-level products indicates that they already have 4 computing units versus 2, which are available in entry-level products. Also in this case it can be a worthy competitor to entry-level discrete accelerators. But the weak processor part is the factor today that significantly reduces the performance of laptops based on these chips. Therefore, you can only look in their direction if you need the fastest possible graphics subsystem at the minimum cost of a mobile computer. The main specifications of this CPU family are listed in Table 5.
Table 5 - AMD CPU parameters for mid-range laptops.
CPU markings | Clock frequencies, GHz | Graphics accelerator | Thermal package, W |
|
The hardest comparison to make between laptop processors is in the entry-level product segment. On the one hand, Intel solutions in this case have a lower cost and an improved processor part. In turn, AMD offers mobile PCs with an improved graphics subsystem. It is based on the last parameter that it is recommended to buy when choosing an entry-level laptop Pavilion 15-AW006UR from HP. All other things being equal to competing solutions, the video card in this case will have a certain performance margin, and the processor is not that much inferior to the Intel CPU. For a mid-level mobile PC, it is recommended to choose the Aspire E5 - 774 - 50SY from Acer. It has an i5 chip installed - 7200U, which is only slightly inferior to flagship products. And its other technical specifications are at an acceptable level, as for a middle-class laptop. Comparison of laptop processors in the niche of the most productive solutions indicated which is best to buy mobile computers based on 7th generation i7 chips. The most affordable, but also very equipped laptop option is the IdeaPad 510-15 IKB from Lenovo. This is what we recommend buying when choosing the most productive mobile PC. At the same time, the price is quite affordable for this class of devices, and the equipment is excellent.
Results
A comparison of laptop processors from two leading chip manufacturers today clearly and clearly indicates that in most cases the leading positions are occupied by products from Intel. AMD, in turn, lags significantly behind its direct competitor. The only market segment where parity is still maintained is mobile products entry level, where AMD has a worthy alternative. In all other cases, it would be more correct to purchase laptops based on Intel CPUs. The current situation can be radically changed by the release of processors based on the Zen architecture in 2017. But whether AMD will be able to do this - time will tell. Now, in the niche of mid-level and premium mobile PCs, it is most correct to rely on solutions from Intel. Although their price is somewhat high, the level of performance more than compensates for this shortcoming.
When choosing a processor from AMD, you are faced with many incomprehensible letters and numbers. What do they mean? How to separate an average processor from a weak one? You will learn about this in our material.
Introduction
Processors produced before 2010 will not be considered here, as well as server solutions, chips on the AM1 platform, as well as the AMD Ontario line (on this moment not relevant), so the markings shown in this article may not apply to them.
Here is a video that will help you figure it out, but we recommend that you still read the article, as it is more detailed and will be updated in the future.
Architecture
The market currently offers chips from the 4 latest desktop architectures, and in the second half of 2016 it is planned to introduce to the world a new Zen architecture with a large jump in performance per clock and reduced to 14 nm, which may help catch up with Intel in the top segment.
Sockets
Current platforms at the beginning of 2016 include FM2, FM2+ and AM3+
Processor lines
E - series
Budget entry-level processors designed for laptops and netbooks.
E1 have 2 cores on board, and E2 - 4.
Belonging to a particular generation is determined by the first digit:
- 7-Carrizo-L
- 6 - Beema
- 2, 3 - Kabini (not taking into account old chips before 2012, which have the same number)
There are quite a few chips in this series, and if there is a need, you can familiarize yourself with the models at.
APU
AMD processors with integrated graphics core (APU) are divided into lines:
- A4 – 2 cores
- A6 – 2 cores
- A8 – 4 cores
- A10 – 4 cores
A12-8800B falls out of this nomenclature, but you can read about it.
Accordingly, from weaker to more powerful, both in graphics and in the processor part. Here's an example:
The first digit indicates the processor cores (generation).
| GENERATION | NUMBER IN THE CHIP NAME |
|---|---|
| Carrizo | 8 |
| Godavari | 7 |
| Kaveri | 7 |
| Richland | 4, 6 |
| Trinity | 4, 5 |
In our case, having the number 7, we get Kaveri kernels.
It is worth noting that the number 4 for the A4 series on Richland architecture means a reduced frequency, which leads to reduced performance.
850 – indicates performance among similar processors in frequency (more is better)
- P – standard power consumption in the case of mobile processors (35 W)
- B – designation of Pro processors
- M – mobile processor (old designation)
- K – unlocked for overclocking
- T – reduced power consumption (stationary PCs)
Interestingly, there are A-processors labeled with the FX trademark. As a rule, these are the company's most powerful laptop processors. They are also built on APU architecture.
Athlon
Now let's talk about Athlon. Essentially these are the same A-processors, but with a disabled video core for a lower price.
Let's take as an example
- X4 – denotes 4 processor cores
- 8 – is an index of Kaveri cores (7 – Trinity)
We see no point in pointing to earlier models, since even the top-end Athlon X4 860K chip for this socket demonstrates the results of an average chip by modern standards, so we do not advise you to buy these processors in 2016. If at first it suits you, then when upgrading you will have to change and motherboard, which will cost a pretty penny and will recoup the money saved on this decision.
- 60 – just like in the previous case, indicates the position of the processor in the lineup
- K – has the same meaning
FX
Now let's talk about the fastest AMD processors - the FX series. These chips have great overclocking potential and a very affordable price tag. The main disadvantage stems from the rather outdated architecture and production technology - energy consumption. The TDP - performance ratio is greatly inferior Intel processors, but the price - performance is at a very good level. The nomenclature outlined below is not valid for FX 9xxx - these are the same 8xxx, but with an increased clock frequency. Here is the chip we chose as an example:
The first digit indicates the number of cores, in this case 8.
The second indicates a generation
- 3 – Vishera cores
- 1, 2 – Zambezi cores
The remaining numbers indicate the frequency of the chip within the same family, but we believe that this does not matter. We advise you to take the youngest model in the line, since the older ones are exactly the same, but with factory overclocking. Why overpay for factory overclocking if the “stones” drive so well?
If you have any questions, you can visit the website, you can find some useful information there.
This article did not provide information about older chips, as well as about server solutions due to the outdated technology (technical process, architecture) of the former and the specificity of application and high cost of the latter. We hope that our material helped you understand the range of AMD processors and will help you make your choice.
A week ago, AMD held a small presentation dedicated to the new Ryzen Mobile APUs, previously known under the code name Raven Ridge. The speaker - however, as usual - first complained about the current situation in the world of processors. They say that Moore’s law is no longer so strictly observed and everyone has already gotten used to “5-7% growth per year” (it is known whose garden this stone is in). And even in desktops, where there are no special restrictions, five years ago the competitor’s mainstream processor had 4 cores (and 8 threads) with a frequency of about 3.5 GHz, and until recently the same 4C/8T, but at about 4 GHz. Only this year, the competitor changed tactics, offering more cores for the same price as before. In the mobile segment, in this sense, until this fall, it was even worse - the stability of configurations is no longer a sign of skill. Lack of competition is bad for the market and end consumers. However, we have already heard all this from AMD before.
On the left is the CCX block of Zen cores, on the right is the GPU block (blue)
The company itself has been developing new cores (CPU and GPU) for the last four years, and, according to AMD, the important thing is that they tried to make them as scalable as possible. Powerful server solutions, desktop systems, and now mobile systems for laptops are made on the same basis. Strictly speaking, AMD Ryzen Mobile 7 2700U and 5 2500U are one CCX with four Zen cores (8 threads), Radeon Vega graphics and a slightly modified Infinity Fabric bus. The latter combines the CPU, GPU, memory controller, display and multimedia units, as well as a peripheral controller. The basic version of both chips has a TDP of 15 W, but system manufacturers, with the approval of AMD, can independently configure the TDP in the range from 12 (the table shows 9, but 12 was repeatedly stated) to 25 W - everything will depend on the quality of the cooling system. Such settings are not available to the user.
At the microarchitecture level, the new APUs are not much different from the desktop versions of crystals and . The changes concern those areas that are critical specifically for the mobile segment. The developers, for example, cut down the L3 caches to 4 MB - just so as not to inflate the size of the crystal. We also had to abandon HBM for GPUs - video memory is cut off from the main DDR4. The specific capacity depends on the OEM of the laptop. For tests (benchmarks are given below), AMD used configurations with 256 MB of video memory, but in general there will be options for 512-1024 MB, fortunately relatively large volume RAM is no longer uncommon in modern laptops. And yes, the overall performance of the complex will again partially depend on the frequency random access memory.
The DDR4-2400 memory controller has also remained almost unchanged: it is dual-channel, but for some ultraportable solutions AMD insists on using a single-channel configuration - in this case, the difference in graphics performance will be approximately 20-40%. ECC is supported, but we are unlikely to see this in laptops. The differences between the AMD Ryzen Mobile 7 2700U and 5 2500U are not that great. The older model has base and increased frequencies of 2.2 and 3.8 GHz, respectively, and the younger model has 2.0 and 3.6 GHz. The 2500U has eight Radeon Vega CU modules with a frequency of 1.1 GHz, and the 2700U has ten of them and they operate at 1.3 GHz. Yes, for now only two APU models will be available, but next year AMD promises to significantly increase their number. The crystal has an area of 209.78 mm 2 and contains approximately 4.95 billion transistors. Technological process - 14 nm.
However, some important changes in the new chipsets are worth mentioning. The technology for dynamic control of the frequency of Precision Boost crystals has acquired the number 2 in its name. It still changes frequencies in 25 MHz steps, but in this case this step is used in both the GPU and CPU. Besides, a new version copes better with multi-threaded workloads - the main limiting factor in the case of laptops will be cooling efficiency rather than power limits. In addition, the new APUs have the Mobile XFR subsystem - it also further increases the turbo frequency above the nominal, but here its task is to maintain the established overclocking for as long as possible. The exact amount of frequency increase, the number of activated cores and specific models APUs with mXFR have not been announced, but it is reported that this technology is designed more for high-performance laptops with good cooling.
However, some additions are also provided in the power subsystem. The chips contain thousands of individual sensors (and regulators) that measure voltages directly at the transistor blocks, with millivolt accuracy. That is, data on the state of external VREGs is no longer so important. There was already voltage regulation for individual Zen cores, and now it has been added for the GPU. It is curious that an AMD representative claims that the worst load case, when the peak occurs simultaneously on the CPU and GPU, supposedly does not occur in practical operating scenarios. This, of course, can be argued. However, the main task in the case of an APU is the correct and fast distribution of power between the graphics and processor parts, depending on which of them really needs it. Actually, the main innovation in the APU is the LDO controllers built into the GPU. It is argued that no one currently has such an effective implementation of this technology.
New internal LDOs unified for CPU/GPU, as AMD itself says, allow in the case of APUs to reduce current requirements by 36%, while increasing the maximum current for powering the CPU or GPU by 20% - in fact, you can make either a more powerful solution, leaving that the same power system, or, conversely, reduce it but maintain performance. In any case, the energy efficiency of the final solution increases, because dynamic distribution of frequency and power depending on the load occurs both between the CPU cores and between the graphics and central processors. However, specific details of the distribution algorithm are not disclosed. On the other hand, not only the algorithm is important, but also the speed of switching between different CPU/GPU states and their number, which, in particular, is necessary for more efficient use of the laptop battery.
In the new APUs, the GPU has a special mode in which the power consumption of the card is reduced by 95%. It is activated when literally nothing happens on the screen, that is, a static picture is displayed - for example, if the user simply steps away from the PC for a while. A similar state exists for CPU cores. The transition between the main states in both cases takes 100 microseconds or less (typical value is 50 microseconds), and for deep sleep mode it takes up to 1.5 ms. In addition, the internal components of the APU are conventionally divided into two zones with different power policies, which also contributes to energy efficiency. The Infinity Fabric bus carries data from various internal sensors and controllers.
The developers also note the small thickness of the finished product - only 1.38 mm. Previously, as stated, not all ultrabooks were able to fit existing chips precisely because of their thickness. As for the GPU, it is worth noting the presence of FreeSync 2 technology. AMD will try to ensure that manufacturers, whenever possible, add support for it to the displays of their laptops. The video card itself supports multi-monitor configurations, image output with 4K resolution and HDR. Right now, together with Microsoft, support for PlayReady is being prepared, which is necessary for the correct operation of some video streaming services. Well, in general, AMD continues to adhere to the long-term 25 × 20 strategy, which was announced in 2014. According to it, by 2020, the overall APU performance should increase by 25 times compared to 2014 models.
Unfortunately, during the presentation AMD did not present full specifications new products (for example, there is no data on integrated controllers for peripherals), showing only some benchmarks. Let us note several important points in them. Firstly, in some cases the comparison is not with competitor solutions, but only with AMD products on the old platform. Secondly, where such a comparison does exist, an eighth-generation chip with the same nominal TDP of 15 W was used, which was available on the market (and there are still few of them). Thirdly, various acceleration technologies or any other “cheating” were not used, including, for example, laptop tests in a pre-cooled room. Below in the gallery are the test results, as well as comments and notes on them.
AMD Ryzen Mobile Benchmarks
The new products perform best in multi-threaded applications, as well as in software that actively uses the graphics subsystem. AMD notes that now on ultra-thin laptops you can, for example, safely do video and graphics processing and not worry too much about the autonomy of the device. And of course, according to the company, a new niche is emerging for them - games. Naturally, heavy gaming monsters will feel uncomfortable here, but popular e-sports projects work well with acceptable resolution and graphics quality. By the way, options with Dual Graphics are not yet expected; instead, developers can use DirectX 12 tools for sharing resources of different GPUs.