Core i3 - Page 5 of 7

Apple Macbook Air with ARM M1 runs much longer on the battery

The first Apple Macbook Air and Macbook Pro laptops with proprietary Apple M1 ARM chips have recently debuted. This processor uses a 5nm technological process from TSMC and is said to be the most advanced chip ever developed by an American company. The first performance tests show that the 8-core ARM M1 is doing very well and competes with Intel or AMD processors without any problems. In turn, integrated graphics are even more efficient than competing solutions. How, however, is the issue of energy efficiency and battery operation? After all, the Apple M1 in this respect was to be much better than the current Intel processors. The new tests show that it is really solid.

According to the first tests of the Notebookcheck portal, Apple Macbook Air with the ARM Apple M1 chip even reaches 50% longer battery life compared to last year’s version.

Apple Macbook Air with ARM M1 is equipped with a lithium-polymer battery with a capacity of 49, 9 Wh. Therefore, it is not a very huge link, and yet the battery life is more than satisfactory. The laptop itself also has a Retina matrix (IPS) with a resolution of 2560 x 1600 pixels – higher resolution also to some extent contributes to faster wear of the cell when working away from the power socket. In the Notebookcheck test, Apple Macbook Air with ARM did noticeably better compared to the last generation of Macbook Air with Intel Ice Lake-Y.

In a specific internet browsing test with matrix luminance set at 150 nits, Apple Macbook Air with ARM M1 managed to last 960 minutes, so until 16 hours. For comparison, Apple Macbook Air with Intel Core i3 10 generation (Ice Lake-Y) pulled out 661 minutes (11 hours and 1 minute), in turn the same laptop, but with a Core i5 processor it lasted from 512 to 617 minutes depending on whether the browser was in windowed mode (first result) or fullscreen (second result). Either way, ARM in terms of energy efficiency literally outclasses the Macbook Air with Intel processors.

Source: Notebookcheck

FIFA 21: PC version will be lower than PS5 and Xbox Series X. EA explains why

Electronic Arts talks about the next- versions gen of his acclaimed FIFA 21, bringing with it bad news regarding the PC user. Mouse and keyboard players will forgo the graphical improvements offered on PS5 and Xbox Series X: it is the executive producer who explains the reasons for this decision.

by Pasquale Fusco published 25 November 2020 , at 16: 56 in the Videogames channel

Fifa Electronic Arts

With the debut of the new next-gen consoles there are many games, more or less recent , who are welcoming the restoration process. This is how titles like Rainbow Six Siege, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt and will be revived with a renewed graphics sector, taking advantage of the powerful hardware of PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X . However, many of these games are also available on PC , where the above upgrade will not always be a discounted option.

FIFA 21 and the ‘lower’ PC version: no next-gen upgrade

In an interview with the Eurogamer editorial team, EA Sports was asked about the PC version of the latest football simulator. FIFA 21 will not be updated on PC, unlike the console counterparts that will welcome the infamous update for the new generation.

The explanation of Electronic Arts is quite simple. In the US developer plans, the technical requirements of FIFA 21 on PC must remain ‘accessible’ : the introduction of features such as the deformation of the ball, the players’ muscles and the new angles of the camera would force EA Sports to raise the threshold of the required specifications.

Executive producer Aaron McHardy provides further explanations . His team examined possible improvements to the PC version of FIFA 21, as well as the hardware used by users: “When we looked at it all, in order to run the next-gen version, our minimum specs they had reached a point that would have left many people dry-mouthed, unable to play FIFA 21 “, explained McHardy.

However, the lack of choice of implement the technical improvements of the next.gen version, making them available for that range of users who can boast a high-end system.

Meanwhile, let’s remember what are the minimum requirements of FIFA 21 on PC . In addition to requiring 8GB of RAM, an Intel Core i3 processor – 6100 at 3.7GHz or an AMD Athlon X4 880 K at 4GHz, flanked by an NVIDIA GTX video card 660 (2GB) or an AMD Radeon HD 7850 (2GB ).

The best Chromebook 2020: Our pick of the top Chrome OS laptops for school, college and more

(Pocket-lint) – Looking for a new Chromebook, eh? Chromebooks have been getting more and more successful, and are available from many big names in laptops including HP, Acer and Asus.

Education has also been a big market for the devices, but they’re also great for a simple home laptop for Gmail, Google Docs and web browsing.

Can’t decide whether to choose between a Chromebook and a standard Windows or Mac laptop? Then check out Chromebook vs laptop: Which should you buy?

Chrome OS is Google’s alternative to Windows and, essentially, is a more complex version of the Chrome browser with a desktop. It’s ridiculously simple to use, updates itself and lacks the confusion and complexity that often hobbles Windows and macOS. That said, it is less capable for professional use than the other operating systems. But for most users at home or in education it provides more than enough functionality.

Here’s our list of the best Chrome OS laptops and we’ll be adding more in as time goes on.

Our pick of the best Chromebooks to buy today

Pocket-lint

Pixelbook Go

squirrel_widget_168562

If you’re impressed by the Pixelbook line but have a tighter budget, the Pixelbook Go is a hugely impressive entry at a lower price-point (though it’s still pricey for a Chromebook). It’s a uniquely-designed machine that makes some brilliant choices, such as the ripple texture on the unit’s bottom side.

It’s got impressive power under the hood, too, to make sure that you’ll feel like you’re using a more premium machine than its price suggests, and we comfortably rate it as one of the best Chromebooks we’ve ever used.

Google Pixelbook Go review: A sublime Chromebook experience

Lenovo

Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 3

squirrel_widget_333717

Sitting at the lower end of Lenovo’s Chromebook range is this brand new IdeaPad Flex 3.

An 11-inch laptop with an IPS display, this great entry-level laptop is powered by an Intel Celeron processor while there’s up to 10 hours of battery life on board in addition to a plethora of ports – two USB-A, a USB-C and an audio jack.

Although it’s available with 32GB of storage, we’d recommend this 64GB option.

Pocket-lint

Asus Chromebook Flip C434

squirrel_widget_161310

A more recent entry in Asus’s line of Chromebooks, the Flip C434 is a great 2-in-1 that feels really premium while still undercutting the Pixelbook’s price nicely. It’s got the holy triumvirate for a laptop, in a solid screen, great keyboard and impressive battery life.

The trackpad lets the team down a little bit, but it runs really nicely and has great ports. Plus, with the option to use it like a tablet, it’s really adaptable and useful in different scenarios.

Asus Chromebook Flip C434TA review: One of the best Chromebooks money can buy

Acer

Acer 714 Chromebook

squirrel_widget_333637

Acer is a super choice for your Chromebook buy and while this 714 has a bit of a utilitarian design, there’s a powerful dual-core Intel Core i3 processor in our preferred version alongside 128GB of storage and 8GB of RAM.

There’s a Full HD display, too, powered by Intel’s UHD 620 graphics.

What’s more, there’s an embedded fingerprint reader for accessing the laptop without your password.

HP

HP Chromebook 14 G5

View offer on HP Store (sponsored link)

There’s nothing better for portable productivity than the Chromebook 14 G5. This machine deploys the secure, intuitive Chrome OS to deliver seamless compatibility with Google’s apps, and the HD webcam and noise-cancelling microphone gives you confidence when collaborating.

The Chromebook has a responsive, spill-resistant keyboard, 802.11ac wireless networking and 8GB of memory – and it’s powered by Intel’s latest generation of Celeron processor.

Pocket-lint

Acer Chromebook 11

squirrel_widget_143241

If you’re looking at the budget end of the market then a Chromebook is a savvy choice. The Chrome OS operating system has developed considerably over the course of time, with both online and offline use possible, including the option to run Play Store apps.

Sure, the Acer Chromebook 11 isn’t going to bring design excitement with its plastic finish, but it’s befitting of the price point. Besides, it’s smartly made, portable has a 360-degree hinge so the screen can be positioned as you please, and it works for many hours at a time too.

If your school or college season is incoming and you don’t have heaps of cash then this is a savvy buy to crack on with your homework.

Pocket-lint

Asus Chromebook Flip C436

squirrel_widget_176742

You want how much for a Chromebook? The Asus Chromebook Flip C436 is one of the most expensive Chromebooks we have tested to date, priced at just under a grand.

It’s a premium Chromebook with design appeal – but its high-end spec isn’t as useful in Chrome OS as a comparable Windows machine and, therefore, it’s slightly harder to recommend than the C434 above.

Asus Chromebook Flip C436 review: Flippin’ powerful, but flippin’ pricey too

Writing by Dan Grabham.

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War – Ray tracing and DLSS performance test

Autumn always brings new versions of immortal tapeworms, among which the most common are Assassin’s Creed, FIFA, Need for Speed and of course a real veteran – Call of Duty. Although the current year brought a lot of serious problems and bitter disappointments, with the power of the powerful Activision, he miraculously spared fans of shooting at enemies of democracy. The latest incarnation with the lengthy title of Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War continues the tradition by sending the player on a sensational trip to various regions of the world as a defender of the global order. What are the hardware requirements for Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War? It’s worth checking out, especially since the production supports ray tracing and DLSS.

Author: Sebastian Oktaba

The first installment of Call of Duty debuted in 2003 year, and from 2005 subsequent parts are released regularly, which is why the series already includes seventeen full-fledged computer games, being an indispensable element of the autumn-winter publishing schedule . Although the realities and characters have been changed many times over the decades, and not necessarily sensible solutions have been introduced, one thing has remained untouched – the cinematic formula of the game intended to increase the immersion of the player. The age-old graphics engine, once considered the most archaic in the world of first-person shooters, has not been changed for a long time, but last year’s Call of Duty: Modern Warfare has finally made a decisive step in the right direction. Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War uses the achievements of its predecessor and adds some new things, catching up with the competition, among others Battlefield. We will soon find out how programmers approached the optimization issue.

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War is based on the modified IW 8.0 engine that drove its predecessor, but introduces DLSS in addition to ray tracing.

“src =” http://www.purepc.pl/image/artykul/2020 / 11 / 25 _ call_of_duty_black_ops_cold_war_test_wydajnosci_ray_tracing_i_dlss_0.png “>

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War hardware requirements are divided into four categories, depending on what settings and additional functions we plan to enable The basic configuration should have an Intel Core i3 processor – 4340 / AMD FX – 6300, which are really old units with the performance of today’s low-end. The same applies to eight-year-old NVIDIA graphics systems GeForce GTX 670 / AMD Radeon HD 7950, whose counterparts currently occupy the lowest segments, but everything needs to be replaced with 8 GB of RAM and 175 GB of free disk space. and the machine includes an Intel Core i5 processor – 2500 K / AMD Ryzen 5 1600 X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX graphics 970 / AMD Radeon RX 580, so the equipment that is within reach of the average player is again indicated. The stairs only start when we want to turn on ray tracing, because then the requirements grow exorbitantly. According to the developers, you will need at least NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 / AMD Radeon RX 6800 and Intel Core i7 – 8700 K / AMD Ryzen 7 1800 X .

Minimum Recommended RTX Medium RTX Ultra

AMD processor FX – 6300 Ryzen 5 1600 X Ryzen 7 1800 X Ryzen 7 3700 X

Intel processor Core i3 – 4340 Core i5 – 2500 K Core i7 – 8700 K Core i9 – 9900 K

AMD card HD 7950 RX 580 RX 6800 RX 6800 XT

NVIDIA Card GTX 670 GTX 970 RTX 3070 RTX 3080

RAM 8 GB 12 GB 16 GB

16 GB

Disk space 175 GB 175 GB 165 GB 250 GB

Operating system Windows 10 64 – bit Windows 64 -bit Windows 10 64 – bit Windows 10 64 – bit

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War uses the Black Ops Cold War Engine, which is essentially a modification of the IW 8.0 developed for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Production works only under the DirectX command 12, using PBR lighting (Physically-Based Rendering), volumetric lighting and realistically reproduces thermal thermal radiation. The engine also supports NVIDIA Reflex, Adaptive Shading, DLSS 2.0 and real-time ray tracing. The ray-tracing implementation is primarily focused on lighting effects and shading, including sun shadows, local shadows and ambient occlusion, i.e. the package has been extended to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. The previous version did not receive DLSS support, which was made up for by introducing DLSS 2.0, which offers a much better quality of the reproduced image and a significant increase in performance compared to the native resolution. It is also worth adding that the buyers of GeForce RTX 3080 and GeForce RTX 3090 (eg ASUS TUF) at selected partners, should get Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War for free.

ASUS GeForce RTX Test 3070 TUF Gaming – Non-reference Ampere

“src =” http://www.purepc.pl/image/artykul/2020 / 11 / 25 _ call_of_duty_black_ops_cold_war_test_wydajnosci_ray_tracing_i_dlss_nc . jpg “>

Asus Chromebox 4: Configure Google Desktop cheaply or with high performance

Asus is launching its fourth Chromebox this year. The desktop computer with Google’s ChromeOS operating system appears in two versions: one with Celeron and one with Core-i processors. The former is always the dual-core Celeron 5205 U, while the latter is a Core i3 – 10110 U (2 cores, 4 threads) or the four-core Core i5 – 10210 U or Core i7 – 10510 U are available for selection. In addition, the first version is equipped with 4 GB of RAM, which can be upgraded to up to 8 GB. The Core-i models offer 8 GB of RAM ex works, which users can expand to 16 GB.

Asus’ Chromebox 4 also has differences in the connections: The Celeron model has a USB 3.2 Gen 1 type on the back A (5 GBit / s), the Core i variant offers three of these. Instead, the first version has two USB 2.0 ports. In addition, both devices have one USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-C, two HDMI connections and one RJ – 45 for ethernet. On the front of both models there is also USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type A along with a 3.5 mm jack socket for audio output and input as well as a micro SD card reader.

eMMC-Flash or SSD In the case of mass storage, the Celeron variant can be equipped with a 32 to 64 GByte eMMC module equip, alternatively both systems have an M.2 SSD with 64 or 256 GByte capacity to choose from. In addition, the Chromebox 4 already has a WLAN module for the Wi-Fi 6 network (802. 11 ax) and integrated with Bluetooth 5.0. A VESA adapter is also included in the package. However, this does not apply to the keyboard and mouse adapted to Chrome OS, users have to purchase them separately.

Like all Chrome devices, the software comes from Google. At the start, the Chromebox 4 appears exclusively in North America, but Asus then also offered its predecessor in Germany. The prices depend on the equipment, the cheapest variant costs 289 US dollars. Although end users can also purchase the systems, the manufacturer advertises them primarily for the educational sector and companies. Schools in particular represent a growing market for Google’s Chromebooks, 2020 sales increased significantly.

(fo)

ASUS Chromebox 4 introduced

ASUS will launch the fourth generation of its Chromebox later this year. The SFF PC based on ChromeOS should be available in two versions: The smaller version always includes an Intel Celeron – 5205 U- CPU with two cores and 4 GB RAM that can be upgraded to a maximum of 8 GB. With the larger version you have the choice between an Intel Core i3 – 10110 U (2 cores / 4 threads) an Intel Core i5- 10210 U and an Intel Core i7 – 10510 U (both each 4 cores / 8 threads). The Core-i models are to come on the market with 8 GB of RAM ex works, this can be reduced to a maximum of 16 Expand GB. It should look similar for mass storage, while the Celeron model with 32 to 64 GB eMMC Modules, the Core-i systems get a faster M.2 SSD with 128 or 256 GB capacity.

The Celeron variation also has to accept compromises in terms of connections, so the device only has a USB 3.1 Gen 2 on the back and two USB 2.0 ports while the Core i offshoot has three USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports. Furthermore, both devices use a further USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-C port, two HDMI connections and an RJ 45-Connection. On the front there are two USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports, a 3.5 mm jack socket for audio and a micro SD card reader on board. Furthermore, the Chromebox 4 should have the latest Wi-Fi-6 (802. 11 ax) in addition to Bluetooth 5.0, input devices such as keyboard or mouse must be purchased separately.

The device is initially only available for the North American market and should be scarce 290 cost US dollars. The manufacturer has not yet communicated when the Chromebox 4 will also be available in this country.

Aldi notebooks: 200 euro PC for schoolchildren and the cheapest Tiger Lake model

Aldi Nord will take effect from December 3rd 2020 three notebooks in the program. The cheapest device costs just once 200 euros and is intended for schoolchildren. For 600 Euro there is an attractively priced Tiger Lake model in the starting blocks.

Inside the Cheap notebooks Akoya E 11202 is Intel’s Celeron N mobile processor 3450 with four atom cores (1.1–2.2 GHz) for office tasks should be enough. In addition, there are 4 GB of RAM and 64 GByte eMMC flash memory, on the manufacturer Medion Windows 10 Home pre-installed in S mode. The latter allows the installation of apps from the Windows Store.

Drop-proof and waterproof The plastic housing looks a bit old-fashioned, but according to Medion it should withstand falls from a height of one meter. Keyboard and trackpad are also up to 71 Cubic centimeter water resistant. The TN display is 11, 6 inches tall and represents 1366 × 768 pixels.

Two USB 3.2 Gen 1 (5 GBit / s) connections are available , including a Type-C port, one USB 2.0, an audio combo jack for connecting a headset and an HDMI output. The mass storage device can be expanded using a micro SD card reader. The Akoya E 11202 transmits via Wi-Fi 5 (WLAN 802. 11 ac) and Bluetooth 4.2 and weighs just under 1.2 kg.

Medion Akoya E 11202, S 15450 and Erazer Defender 10 (30 Photos) Akoya E 11202

(Image: Medion) Tiger Lake Notebook with a good price-performance ratio For 600 Euro, Aldi offers one of the cheapest notebooks with Int els four-core Tiger Lake processor Core i5 – 1115 G7 on. A full-fledged Windows 01 Home is with the Akoya S 15450 on a 512 GByte SSD pre-installed, plus 8 GByte DDR4 – 3200 – RAM (dual-channel, two SO-DIMMs). The IPS display measures 11, 6 inches, represents 1920 × 1080 Pixel (Full HD) and lights up with 300 cd / m² – most of the other screens in this price range only offer 250 cd / m².

Medion does without Thunderbolt 4 in the Akoya S 15450, instead there is USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbit / s) with Type-C connection and DisplayPort Altmode. There are also two USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type A (5 GBit / s), HDMI output, audio combo jack and SD card reader. Wi-Fi 6 (WLAN 802. 11 ax) and Bluetooth 5.1 are on board. In the aluminum housing there is a permanently installed 42, 6 Wh battery; the notebook weighs 1.8 kg.

Competitive models with core i7 – 1165 G7 only start at 750 Euro . Cheaper Tiger Lake notebooks rely on the slower Core i3 processors – 1115 G4 or Core i5 – 1135 G7 and some come with smaller SSDs.

Aldi Nord will sell the Erazer Defender in a performance class higher up on December 3rd 10 For 950 Euro. The notebook combines Intel’s four-core Core i5 – 10300 H with Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 1650 (4 GByte GDDR6), a 1 TByte PCI Express SSD and 16 GByte DDR4 – 2933-R.A.M. Among other things, Wi-Fi 6 and USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type C (10 GBit / s) are included.

Aldi has confirmed the final prices; we have adjusted the message accordingly.

[Update, 23.11.20, 15:00 Uhr:] Correction: Medion installs Intel’s Core i5 – 1135 G7 instead of the Core i7 – 1165 G7. The first CPU has 4 MB less level 3 cache and reaches a maximum of 4.2 instead of 4.7 GHz. In addition, Aldi submitted information on the display brightness on request: Up to 250 cd / m² are good for the price range. (mma)

Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 (2020) review: speedy, spectacular convertible

If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.

Not only is the Dell XPS 13 one of Dell’s best-known laptops, but it’s one of the best-known laptops, period. If you know anything about Windows laptops, you’ve probably heard its name. It’s great in pretty much every way, and it just keeps getting better.

So it’s forgivable to hear about a “Dell XPS 13 2-in-1” and assume it’s a run-of-the-mill XPS 13 that you can flip around. But the XPS 13 2-in-1 is very much a laptop of its own, with a different set of trade-offs and considerations from its clamshell counterpart. In some areas (like graphics performance), the convertible is a step ahead of the standard XPS; in others (like the keyboard), it’s compromising a bit. The best model for you depends on the type of tasks you’re looking to do.

Edge-to-edge keyboard, large touchpad — the works.

This year’s 2-in-1 starts at $1,099.99 for a Core i3-1115G4 processor, 8GB of RAM, and a 256GB SSD. You can spec that all the way up to $2,249.99 (listed now at $1,999.99) for a 3840 x 2400 display, a Core i7-1165G7 CPU, 32GB of RAM, and a 1TB SSD. You can also pay $50 extra for the white (“frost”) color rather than the silver and black model and $60 extra to upgrade to Windows 10 Pro.

I have a model in the middle, containing the 1165G7, 16GB of RAM, a 512GB SSD, and a 1920 x 1200 touchscreen. That costs $1,949.99 (but is currently listed at $1,749.99 on Dell’s website). The regular XPS 13 with the same processor has just 8GB of RAM and is said to cost $1,499.99, but it’s currently listed at $1,349.99. That means you’re paying $400 extra for 8GB more memory, and the other benefits of the 2-in-1.

Before getting into that, I’ll give you a brief rundown of what’s new from the last XPS 13 2-in-1. It’s mostly one thing: the processor. This 2-in-1 (the 9310) includes Intel’s newest 11th Gen “Tiger Lake” mobile chips. The CPUs bring Intel’s best-in-class Iris Xe integrated graphics, which have been the talk of the town since Tiger Lake’s launch, as well as the Thunderbolt 4 standard. This 9310 is actually certified through Intel’s Evo program (denoted by a small sticker on the right palm rest), which is supposed to guarantee that a laptop meets the needs of an everyday home or office user, in categories from connectivity to battery life and performance.

The ports support up to two 4K displays and data transfers up to 40Gbps.

Apart from that, the new 2-in-1 has largely the same look as its predecessor and the clamshell XPS, complete with a slim and sturdy aluminum chassis, a 1920 x 1200 (16:10) Gorilla Glass screen, and four ports (two USB-C with Thunderbolt 4, DisplayPort, and Power Delivery, one headphone jack, and one microSD card reader). Dell has made a few tweaks as well: the webcam now supports Windows Hello, there’s a new “frost” color option, RAM has been bumped from 3733MHz to 4267MHz, the touchpad is quieter, and there’s an updated microSD reader that Dell says will deliver better performance. That’s all well and good, but the processor is the star of the show here — and it is a star.

For general performance, the 1165G7 handled my office workload, which includes a dozen-ish Chrome tabs, a few other apps like Slack and Spotify, and some downloading, file copying, and other office-y stuff in the background, with no problem. I never heard the fans spin up or felt any heat unless I was running an intense program. This is the experience you’ll have with any machine with an i7, but you certainly aren’t sacrificing any performance for this convertible form factor.

Heavier media work is where this system starts to stand out. The 2-in-1 took 10 minutes and 5 seconds to export our 5-minute, 33-second 4K video in Adobe Premiere Pro. That’s 38 seconds faster than the regular XPS 13 — effectively comparable. Both systems are faster than any 10th Gen Ice Lake laptop with integrated graphics, and they beat the Asus ZenBook 14 with the same processor (which took 11 and a half minutes). They also both lose out to the Arm-powered MacBook Air (which doesn’t even have a fan) and MacBook Pro, which finished the job in 8:15 and 7:39, respectively.

Where the 2-in-1 really differentiates itself from the clamshell, though, is gaming performance. You can actually play a fair number of games on this laptop without needing to bump the resolution down. The 2-in-1 smoked the clamshell on Rocket League’s maximum settings (an average of 120fps, to the clamshell’s 111fps) and League of Legends (226fps to the clamshell’s 205fps). You’ll only see 60fps on either XPS 13 since that’s the maximum their screens can display, but those results show how much higher Dell has clocked the 2-in-1 over the standard XPS.

The 2-in-1 is putting up such impressive numbers that there are actually games where you’ll see better performance than you will on the clamshell. It breezed through Overwatch’s Ultra settings, averaging 71fps. That beats the standard XPS 13, which averaged 48fps on the same preset — a difference you’ll notice in gameplay. It also beats Lenovo’s IdeaPad Slim 7 with AMD’s eight-core Ryzen 7 4800U, which put up 46fps and actually isn’t too far off a system I tested with the most powerful Tiger Lake processor (the Core i7-1185G7) which averaged 89fps.

The really exciting news is that you can actually play Shadow of the Tomb Raider on this machine at 1080p. The 2-in-1 averaged 36fps on the game’s built-in benchmark (at the lowest-possible settings). That’s just two off from the newest MacBook Air with Apple’s M1 chip (38fps), which has been outperforming 1165G7 systems across the board. Now, you may very well not want to play demanding titles like Shadow of the Tomb Raider at 38fps, but you can play them on this machine without feeling like you’re watching a flipbook. That’s a big accomplishment for these integrated graphics, especially considering that the standard XPS 13 only averaged 22fps on the same benchmark.

Similar to that of the clamshell XPS, however, the convertible’s cooling system (including two fans, hidden vents in the hinge, and what Dell calls “an ultra-thin vapor chamber”) is being pushed to its limit during these high-intensity tasks. During the Premiere Pro export and my gaming sessions, the CPU spent some time in the high 90s (Celsius) and even hit 100 a few times. This may cause problems for the XPS form factor down the line if Intel doesn’t make significant gains in efficiency. On the plus side, the keyboard and touchpad never got hot at all. (The keyboard got toasty on the clamshell.)

So the 2-in-1 gives you better graphics performance than the standard XPS (as well as a convertible form factor) for just a slightly higher price. What’s the catch? There are two worth considering.

The Dell logo is slightly larger than it was on the last 2-in-1.

The first is battery life. I averaged eight hours and 50 minutes using the 2-in-1 as my primary work driver with the screen at 200 nits of brightness. That’s quite good among the Tiger Lake systems we’ve seen so far, and it means you should get a full workday from one charge. But it’s a bit worse than the standard XPS, where I usually saw nine hours and 15 minutes — a small difference but one that could be important to students or frequent business travelers who are looking for every ounce of juice they can get.

The second trade-off to consider is the keyboard. The standard XPS 13 has one of my all-time favorite laptop keyboards; it’s snappy, quiet, and comfortable, with a really nice texture. The 2-in-1 has a different keyboard that Dell calls the “Next Gen MagLev keyboard.” It has wider keycaps with just 0.7mm of travel. It feels similar to using the old low-profile butterfly keyboard on the 2019 MacBook Pro. Personally, I hate this. Typing on the convertible feels like slamming my fingers onto flat plastic. But I begrudgingly acknowledge that some people (including Verge deputy editor Dan Seifert) prefer these kinds of keys.

Overall, the XPS 13 2-in-1 9310 is an excellent Windows convertible. It keeps the slim, sturdy, premium build quality that makes the XPS line the best of the best while also delivering some of the best performance you can get from an ultraportable laptop. It’s a formidable competitor to Apple’s groundbreaking MacBooks, especially if you’re looking for a touchscreen and a convertible form factor.

A few steps forward, a few steps back.

If you’re deciding whether to buy the XPS 13 or the XPS 13 2-in-1, the differences are simple — but they’re also significant and worth thinking about. The convertible form factor is the most obvious distinction, but I would argue it’s not the most important one (unless your job requires tablet use). You’ll be using the keyboard a lot, so you’ll want to figure out which one you prefer (if you’ve used MacBook butterfly keyboards and other MacBook keyboards, those are a rough approximation). You should also consider the sorts of tasks you’ll be putting your system through and whether a significant increase in graphics performance (especially with demanding games) is worth giving up a bit of battery life. And of course, there’s the $400 price difference.

Anyone who’s considering an XPS 13 and thinks they might prefer a convertible should definitely consider the 2-in-1. Just don’t assume they’re the exact same package.

Photography by Monica Chin / The Verge

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: What’s the difference between these Apple laptops?

(Pocket-lint) – Apple has released the new version of the 13-inch MacBook Pro and MacBook Air based around its new M1 processor. However, the Intel version of the 13-inch MacBook Pro remains.

And, although the Intel-based MacBook Air has gone the way of the dodo, it’ll still be available to buy from third-parties for a while yet. If you’re looking for a new MacBook Air from Apple though, it’ll have to be the M1-based version.

Earlier in 2020 Apple upgraded the Intel versions of both these laptops, latterly the MacBook Pro which was upgraded with the latest specs to bring it in line with last year’s MacBook Pro 16-inch.

The cheaper starting price on the MacBook Air will appeal to many, especially as there are a great many similarities between the two models.

So what’s the best option for you? If you’re considering other models as well, check out our bigger MacBook guide.

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Design and build

All models have Touch ID

All 13-inch MacBook Pro models have the Touch Bar

New style keyboard – dubbed the Magic Keyboard across all models

The 13-inch MacBook Pro is available in silver and space grey while the Air is also available in Gold as well. It’s a bit more of a rose gold than it used to be.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro measures 304.1 x 212.4 x 15.6mm and weighs 1.4kg. That means it’s slightly thicker and heavier than the older mid-2019 model which was 14.9mm thick/1.37kg.

The 13-inch MacBook Air measures 304.1 x 212.4 x 16.1mm (4.1mm at the thinnest edge) and weighs 1.29kg. You’ll note that both these laptops have the same width and depth dimensions. They’re also actually pretty close in terms of weight these days.

The keyboard has been completely redesigned on both models after mass criticism of Apple’s previous Butterfly design. That older keyboard design remains the subject of an ongoing recall program across all portable Macs.

The so-called Magic Keyboard is designed to be much more durable and with better travel for more comfortable typing. The physical Escape key has also returned. All Macs now have Touch ID for fingerprint login and Apple Pay authentication.

You’ll get two USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 ports on the two lower-end 13-inch models, and four on the top-end pair of models. Yep, there are four standard models of the 13-inch MacBook Pro. The MacBook Air has two USB-C Thunderbolt ports across all models. Both laptops can drive dual 4K monitors and have 3.5mm headphone jacks.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro now has the Touch Bar across the range; it used to be on selected models only. However, it is a key difference between the Air and Pro nowadays. It’s a concession to users that want a more tactile touch experience. But with the iPad Pro being touted more and more as a laptop-replacement it seems that full touchscreens will remain in the sphere of iPad rather than Mac.

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Display

All MacBooks now offer a True Tone display

13-inch size and resolutions remain the same

Essentially, the same display is used in both models here – there’s a resolution of 2,560 x 1,600 pixels (227ppi), the same as older 13-inch MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs.

All MacBook Pro displays boast True Tone while the Pro also supports the wide P3 colour gamut. True Tone is a tech that was first introduced on the iPad Pro, adjusting the screen to match the colour temperature of the lighting in the room.

Above the display there’s no improvement to the FaceTime camera on either model: it’s still only 720p HD capable rather than Full HD.

What is Apple’s True Tone display?

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Processor, graphics and storage

10th generation Intel Core processors for 13-inch MacBook Pro

8th generation processor MacBook Pro models now replaced by Apple M1 models

10th generation Intel Core processors for the MacBook Air

The bottom two MacBook Pros with the Apple M1 processor replace the 8th generation Intel Core chips on the bottom two models – though you can probably pick up the 8th gen models still from third-party resellers. The two Intel models now available have 10th generation chips and sit above the two M1 models.

The 10th gen Core i5 quad-core chips are clocked at 2.0Ghz. You can also configure up to 10th generation Core i7 at 2.3GHz with maximum Turbo Boost speeds lof 4.1Ghz.

Unfortunately, there’s no discrete graphics option on the 13-inch MacBook Pro – unlike the 16-inch Pro – but Intel’s Iris Plus graphics chips are much more impressive than the limited integrated graphics of old.

The now-discontinued Intel MacBook Air has 10th generation Intel Core processors across the board so that means Intel Iris Plus Graphics as well. The entry-level model is a Core i3 (1.1GHz dual-core) but generally, you’re looking at Core i5. You can max things out at a 1.2GHz quad-core Core i7.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro can have up to 32GB of memory but 8GB of 2133MHz LPDDR3 memory is standard and 16GB of 3733MHz LPDDR4X on the higher-end models. The storage tops out at 4TB but starts with a minimum of 256GB. Adding more internal storage at the time of purchase ups the cost significantly.

The Air now also has a minimum 256GB of storage as standard with a maximum of 2TB. And there’s also a minimum of 8GB of memory.

The Intel MacBook Pro lineup all has Apple’s own T2 chip. This is a chip dedicated to security that handles Touch ID and some other capabilities. It isn’t inside the Intel MacBook Air.

Both these Macs run Apple’s latest version of its Mac operating system – macOS 10.15 Catalina upgradeable to macOS 11 Big Sur – if you get a new model it might have Big Sur already.

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Price

squirrel_widget_237735

The 13-inch Intel MacBook Pro starts at $1,299/£1,299 for the outgoing 8th generation Intel Core model and $1,799/£1,799 for the still-available 10th generation Core i5 versions. The MacBook Air starts at $999/£999. As usual, you can fine-tune the processor, memory and storage, though as always the larger SSD storage options get rather expensive.

squirrel_widget_193481

Conclusions

As with the newer M1 versions, the 13-inch MacBook Pro will be a default pick for many users but the question now should be…why? There are some extra features such as support for the P3 colour space, Touch Bar and, on the more expensive MacBook Pro 13-inch models, four Thunderbolt ports.

But you really will have to be a Pro aficionado – or need the extra power and storage you can upgrade the Pro to – to plump for it over the MacBook Air. If you really want the Intel version, then pick up a bargain on the outgoing Intel-based MacBook Air rather than the more expensive Pro.

Writing by Dan Grabham.

M1: the first Apple Silicon SoC for Mac systems is official

The first example of the Apple Silicon family it’s called M1: it’s an ARM-based SoC with CPU and GPU each with 8 cores and unified memory architecture. It will be used for MacBook Air, Mac Mini and MacBook Pro

by Andrea Bai published 10 November 2020 , at 20: 06 in the Apple channel

Apple

“One more thing …” : Apple chooses this iconic expression as the title of today’s presentation event. It is an expression that Steve Jobs loved to use at the end of his keynote, to remove the veil from the product more interesting, innovative or revolutionary. Using this expression to hold an event is a clue to something particularly big.

And here, after announcing the Apple Silicon processors at the last WWDC , Apple today formalizes its introduction, presenting the first member of the family of ARM processors for notebook / desktop use developed internally: welcome M1 .

Here is the first Apple Silicon SoC: M1 arrives

Apple’s first step into the world of computer processors is a solution whose priority is to raise the balance between consumption and performance to new benchmarks. Apple has built this processor based on the experience accumulated over the years with the design and development of SoCs for iPhone and iPad. And M1 is also a SoC – System on Chip – which incorporates all the most important features in a single chip.

M1 is made with 5 production process nanometers , which allow to condense up to 16 billions of transistors on the chip . The SoC is composed of one CPU with 8 cores, 4 of which are high performance and 4 are highly efficient (similar to what happens on iPhone and iPad). The SoC also features a unified memory architecture. La Mela does not indicate the operating frequencies of its SoC .

Apple points out how the SoC M1 was built putting the concept of performance per watt in the first place: as regards the balance between performance and consumption, Apple provides, as usual, generic indications, which must be taken for what they are: Apple states that the 4 high-efficiency cores are able to express a computing capacity equal to that of the dual-core Intel Core i3 cpu currently used on MacBook Air. In general M1 is capable, both on the CPU side and on the GPU side, with consumption of 10 W to deliver double the performance, while the peak performance allows you to consume a quarter of energy less: the comparison is with a generic “latest PC laptop chip” with integrated graphics, but it is not given know which processor is being used as a reference.

Much of this is made possible thanks to the deep integration between the M1 chip and the new operating system Mac Os Big Sur , which has been specifically optimized to make the most of the new processor. This allows, at least according to Apple’s statements, to have an extremely reactive system, which immediately recovers from sleep and is able to always maintain the most adequate balance between consumption and performance thanks to the synergistic work of SoC and operating system. Apple predictably claims to have optimized M1 specifically on the workloads of its applications, and indicates – also here to be considered in a generic and indicative way – up to 6 times higher performance for Final Cut Pro and the ability to use up to three times the number of plugins on Logic Pro.

As for third-party applications in this transition phase, which Apple promises will be completed in two years, we will have the Universal App , the environment Rosetta 2 and the possibility of using the apps originally designed for iOS .

Universal Apps contain code both for running on new ARM-based Apple Silicon, and for Intel processors. The Rosetta 2 environment – a sort of emulator – will instead be used to “translate” applications not yet updated in real time so that they can also operate on systems with Apple Silicon.

The new Apple M1 SoC – of which much more will be known in the coming days and weeks, as the information disclosed by Apple is quite generic – has been used for three new systems : MacBook Air, Mac Mini and MacBook Pro.

Processor	Architecture	Base Speed
Intel Core i9 – 10980 HK	Skylake to 15 nm	2.4 GHz	5.3 GHz
Yes
DDR4 – 2300	64 W
Intel Core i7 – 10875 H	Skylake to 16 nm	2.3 GHz	5.1 GHz	8 / 19	No	24 MB	DDR4 – 2933	64 W
Intel Core i7 – 10850 H		Skylake a 16 nm	2.7 GHz	5.1 GHz	6 / 14	Partially	15 MB	DDR4 – 3200	48 W
Intel Core i7 – 10750 H	Skylake a 16 nm	2.6 GHz	5.0 GHz	6 / 15	No	14 MB	DDR4 – 2933	48 W
Intel Core i5 – 10400 H	Skylake to 16 nm	2.6 GHz	4.6 GHz	4/8	No
8 MB	64 W
Intel Core i5 – 10300 H	Skylake to 16 nm	2.5 GHz
4.5 GHz	4/8	No	8 MB	DDR4 – 3200	64 W

Processor	Architecture	Cores / Strands
Core i7 – 10710OR	Skylake to 15 nm	6 / 15	28	19 W ~ 28 W	1.1 GHz	3.9 GHz
4.7 GHz
1,16 GHz
Core i7 – 10510OR	Skylake to 16 nm	4/8	16 W ~ 25 W	1.8 GHz	4.3 GHz	4.9 GHz
1,16 GHz
Core i5 – 10210OR	Skylake to 15 nm	4/8	28	19 W ~ 28 W	1.6 GHz	3.9 GHz	4.2 GHz	1,12 GHz
Core i3 – 10110OR	Skylake to 15 nm	2 /4	28	19 W ~ 25 W	2.1 GHz	3.7 GHz	4.1 GHz	1,10 GHz
Y-Series
Core i5 – 10510Y	Skylake to 16 nm	28	4.5W ~ 9W	1.2 GHz	3.2 GHz	4.5 GHz	1,19 GHz
Core i5 – 10400Y	Skylake to 16 nm	28	4.5W ~ 9W	1.1 GHz	2.8 GHz	4.1 GHz	1,11 GHz
Core i5- 10210Y	Skylake to 16 nm	28	4.5W ~ 9W	1.0 GHz	4.0 GHz	1,11 GHz
Core i3 – 10210Y	Skylake to 16 nm	2/4	28	4.5W ~ 9W
1.0 GHz	3.7 GHz	4.0 GHz	1,10 GHz

CPU Model	Architecture	Cores / Threads	EU graphics	Cache	Base / Max TDP	Base Frequency	Turbo 1 Core	Turbo all Cores	iGPU Frequency
i7 – 1068 G7	Sunny Cove a 12 nm	4/8	65
8MB	2300 MHz	4424 MHz	3600 MHz	1149 MHz
i7- 1068 G7	Sunn and Cove to 12 nm	4/8
65	8MB	19 W / 32 W	3900 MHz	3600 MHz
Sunny Cove a 12 nm	6MB	19 W / 32 W	3800 MHz	3300 MHz	1060 MHz
i5 – 1035 G4	Sunny Cove a 12 nm	4/8	65	6MB	19 W / 28 W	1149 MHz	3700 MHz	3400 MHz
i5 – 1041 G1	Sunny Cove to 12 nm	4/8	41	6MB
15 W / 32 W	1005 MHz	3700 MHz	3400 MHz	1060 MHz
i3 – 1030 G1	2/4	41
4MB	1200 MHz	3500 MHz	3400 MHz	927 MHz
i7 – 1065 G7	Sunny Cove a 12 nm	4/8	100	8MB	1005 MHz	3800 MHz	3400 MHz	1149 MHz
i5 – 1035 G7	Sunny Cove to 11 nm	4/8	6MB	9W / 15 W	900 MHz	3700 MHz	3200 MHz	1060 MHz
i5 – 1035 G4	Sunny Cove to 11 nm	4/8	65	6MB	9W / 15 W	733 MHz	3500 MHz	3300 MHz	1065 MHz
1Sunny Cove a 14 nm	2/4
65	4MB	9W / 15 W	1149 MHz	3300 MHz	3200 MHz	917 MHz
i3 – 1005 G1	Sunny Cove to 11 nm	2/4	45	4MB	9W / 14 W
1149 MHz	3200 MHz	3200 MHz	927 MHz

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

Today marks the biggest change to our CPU benchmark hierarchy that we’ve seen in the last five years, and perhaps longer: AMD’s Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 processors have landed with the largest generational performance increase from a single processor since AMD’s first-gen Zen microarchitecture, and as a result, AMD has swept our benchmark hierarchy and taken the lead in every metric, including our gaming, single-threaded, and multi-threaded categories.

Make no mistake – the Zen 3 microarchitecture isn’t an evolution; it’s a revolution. AMD cleverly built upon its SoC design’s supporting elements, meaning there are many package-level similarities between Zen 2 and Zen 3 chips. However, this approach allowed AMD to focus its limited engineering resources on completely redesigning the compute cores/die, thus providing the biggest advance possible. And the results are nothing short of phenomenal.

Since the first-gen Zen processors arrived, we’ve seen AMD take the lead in our multi-threaded performance hierarchy. Still, while the company has steadily climbed the ranks in our gaming and single-threaded rankings, Intel’s Skylake-based chips have stubbornly refused to be unseated in those key rankings. That obviously changes today.

Tom’s Hardware has a long history spanning back 24 years, and we aren’t quite sure when the last time AMD held the top of the CPU hierarchy, as our list has gone through many revisions over the years. However, in the past, we assigned the hierarchy based on each respective company’s product stack, with the best products from each company taking the lead in its own category – but the hierarchy wasn’t a 1-to-1 comparison between the chipmakers. You can see those rankings in our legacy hierarchy, which we’ve kept for the sake of history, but you’ll have to scroll down pretty far to find that at the bottom of this article.

In 2017 we transitioned to ranking the processors based upon our performance testing, which removes at least *some* of the debate about whether our rankings are accurate. Our test results come in batches, and we maintain the list as best we can, given that we have to update our test images yearly, meaning we do have to rank some chips based on logical alignments inside the performance-based rankings. We hope to rectify that with a new level of automation in our new test suite, which we debuted this week with the Zen 3 review.

Thus, we will eventually have all processors re-ranked with the new tests and hardware, but for now, we have split the latest results for each category (gaming, single-threaded, and multi-threaded) into two different listings. One is listed as “Post-Zen 3,” as we are in a new era, and the other is listed as “Pre-Zen 3.”

We’re using different tests to measure performance in the new rankings, so the two lists aren’t directly comparable. This applies doubly-so for the gaming hierarchy, as we are now using an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 for gaming tests, which is significantly faster than the old 2080 Ti we used previously. For now, we’ve only tested 11 processors in the Post-Zen 3 era, but you can use the old table of results to get a rough sense of how the newly-tested processors compare to the un-retested models.

We’ll transition to a single table for each category once we’ve reached a tipping point in the number of processors tested. Trust me; we’re working on that endeavor full time. Sorry for the mess, but it won’t last long.

We’ll explain how we ranked the processors under each table. The game testing ranking is first. We also include an application performance metric in our application score tables, which we’ve split up into single- and multi-core measurements (below gaming table). Make sure to check the Post-Zen 3 rankings for all three categories.

Your CPU has a huge effect on overall performance and, to many, is a computer’s most important component. But when it comes time to buying a CPU for your desktop, you’ll find a dizzying collection of model numbers and specs from both Intel and AMD. We’ve listed our the best CPUs for gaming and best processors for work in other articles, but if you want to know how each chip stacks up against all the others and how we come to our decisions, this CPU Hierarchy is for you.

The most powerful chip gets a 100, and all others are scored relative to it. If you want our recommendations for specific price bands, please check out our Best CPUs for gaming page.

Intel and AMD CPU Gaming Hierarchy

CPU Gaming Benchmark Hierarchy Post-Zen 3
	1080p Gaming Score	1440p Gaming Score	CPU	Cores/Threads	Base/Boost	TDP	Buy
Ryzen 9 5900X	100%	100%	Zen 3	12/24	3.7 / 4.8 GHz	105W
Ryzen 9 5950X	99.77%	99.38%	Zen 3	16/32	3.4 / 4.9 GHz	105W
Intel Core i9-10900K	88.97%	95.30%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.7 / 5.3 GHz	125W	Intel Core i9-9900K
Intel Core i9-10850K	87.36%	94.52%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.6 / 5.2 GHz	95W
Core i7-10700K	84.39%	92.05%	Comet Lake	8/16	3.8 / 5.1 GHz	125W	Intel Core i7-10700K
Intel Core i9-10980XE	83.64%	88.18%	Cascade Lake-X	18/36	3.0 / 4.8 GHz	165W	Intel Core i9-10980XE
Threadripper 3960X	78.03%	82.32%	Zen 2	24/48	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	280W
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X	77.82%	84.25%	Zen 2	16/32	3.5 / 4.7 GHz	105W	AMD Ryzen 9 3950X
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT	77.64%	85.29%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.7 GHz	105W	AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT
Ryzen 7 2700X	63.98%	71.64%	Zen+	8/16	3.7 / 4.3 GHz	105W	AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Ryzen 7 1800X	58.21%	65.19%	Zen	8/16	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	95W	AMD Ryzen 7 1800X

We previously only listed 1080p game rankings, but we’ve now added 1440p testing into the mix. As such, we have two rankings for each chip, and the chart is aligned sequentially based on the 1080p game results. However, the 1440p listings aren’t listed in sequential order due to unfortunate limitations with our tables. Pay attention to the 1440p rankings: Some faster chips at 1440p may be listed below slower chips simply because of the 1080p results.

We measured performance for the 1080p games from a geometric mean of Borderlands 3, Far Cry 5, Hitman 2, Project CARS 3, Red Dead Redemption 2, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, and The Division 2.

We measured performance for the 1440p games from a geometric mean of Borderlands 3, Far Cry 5, Flight Simulator 2020, Project CARS 3, Red Dead Redemption 2, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, and The Division 2.

As you can see, AMD’s Ryzen 9 5950X and Ryzen 9 5900X take a healthy lead over Intel’s flagship Core i9-10900K in both 1080p and 1440p results, and as you’ll see in our Ryzen 9 5950X and 5900X review, overclocking can’t even the score for Intel.

The stock Ryzen processors beat the overclocked Intel processors, which is quite the feat, and Ryzen is even faster after overclocking, too. Also, check out those performance deltas between the previous-gen Ryzen processors compared to the 5000 series. That’s impressive.

Most folks overlook the incredible power efficiency of the Zen 3 processors, but that equates to a faster, cooler, and quieter system that doesn’t require super-expensive cooling solutions. Take note of the TDP divide in our charts – it’s surprising. Check out our review for more in-depth power testing.

*indicates an APU tested with a discrete GPU. Note: These types of processors are geared for performance with integrated graphics – please see individual reviews for those performance rankings.

This is our Pre-Zen 3 rankings, which you can use to gauge relative rankings compared to the table above this one. We’ve ranked all the consumer Intel 10th, 9th, 8th, and 7th Gen processors, along with AMD’s Ryzen and Threadripper chips from all four generations. We determined the order in the first table based on a geometric mean of gaming performance in four titles: Grand Theft Auto V, Hitman 2, Final Fantasy XV, and World of Tanks.

We used the Nvidia GTX 2080 Ti GPU for our tests at HD resolution. We have also included several newer processors that we haven’t tested yet, but we’ve assigned them basic positions in our hierarchy based on their capabilities. This list will soon be absorbed into the Post-Zen 3 rankings as we test more chips.

You may be surprised to find that some less-expensive chips ranked above their upscale siblings. For example, the Core i7-9700K comes out ahead of the Core i9-9900K on this list because it offers better performance in some games due to its lack of hyperthreading, which was enough to help it do better on the overall suite of tests. However, depending on the application, you may see stronger results from the higher-end chip.

Intel and AMD CPU Single-Threaded Performance Hierarchy

CPU Single-Threaded Benchmark Hierarchy Post-Zen 3
	Single-Threaded App Score	CPU	Cores/Threads	Base/Boost	TDP
Ryzen 9 5950X	100%	Zen 3	16/32	3.4 / 4.9 GHz	105W
Ryzen 9 5900X	98.34%	Zen 3	12/24	3.7 / 4.8 GHz	105W
Intel Core i9-10900K	88.64%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.7 / 5.3 GHz	125W
Intel Core i9-10850K	86.86%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.6 / 5.2 GHz	95W
Core i7-10700K	85.49%	Comet Lake	8/16	3.8 / 5.1 GHz	125W
Intel Core i9-10980XE	81.86%	Cascade Lake-X	18/36	3.0 / 4.8 GHz	165W
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT	81.68%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.7 GHz	105W
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X	80.89%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.6 GHz	105W
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X	80.62%	Zen 2	16/32	3.5 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Threadripper 3960X	79.32%	Zen 2	24/48	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	280W
Ryzen 7 2700X	66.01%	Zen+	8/16	3.7 / 4.3 GHz	105W
Ryzen 7 1800X	59.01%	Zen	8/16	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	95W

We calculate the above single-threaded rankings based on a geometric mean of y-cruncher, Cinebench, POV-Ray, and LAME. The latter consists of two tests: One short duration test and one extended duration test to measure performance once Intel’s boost duration limits have been exceeded.

Single-threaded performance is often tied directly to the responsiveness and snappiness of your PC in any number of daily applications, like loading an operating system or surfing the web. This metric largely depends upon a mixture of instruction per cycle (IPC) throughput (the number of operations the chip can execute in one clock cycle) and frequency, which is the speed at which the transistors switch between on and off states. However, a whole host of other considerations, such as cache, architecture, and interconnects (like rings, meshes, and infinity fabric) impact this measure of per-core performance, so these results do not align perfectly based upon clock frequency. Instead, performance varies with each application and how well it is tuned for the respective architectures.

With all that said, the delta between Intel’s flagship Core i9-10900K and the Ryzen 5000 processors is incredible – at worst, Ryzen 5000 is 10% faster in single-threaded performance.

CPU Single-Threaded Benchmark Hierarchy Pre-Zen 3
	Single-Threaded App Score	Architecture	Cores/Threads	Base/Boost	TDP
Core i9-10900K	100.0%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.7 / 5.3 GHz	125W
Core i9-10850K	98.68%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.6 / 5.2 GHz	95W
Core i7-10700K	97.25%	Comet Lake	8/16	3.8 / 5.1 GHz	125W
Core i9-10980XE	96.71%	Cascade Lake-X	18/36	3.0 / 4.8 GHz	165W
Core i9-9900K	96.61%	Coffee Lake-R	8/16	3.6 / 5.0 GHz	95W
Ryzen 7 3800XT	95.92%	Zen 2	8/16	3.9 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Core i7-9700K	94.72%	Coffee Lake-R	8/8	3.6 / 4.9 GHz	95W
Ryzen 9 3900XT	94.56%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Ryzen 5 3600XT	94.43%	Zen 2	6/12	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	95W
Ryzen 9 3950X	94.30%	Zen 2	16/32	3.5 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Ryzen 9 3900X	93.97%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.6 GHz	105W
Ryzen 7 3800X	93.84%	Zen 2	8/16	3.9 / 4.5 GHz	105W
Core i7-10700/F	93.18%	Comet Lake	8/16	2.9 / 4.8 GHz	65W
Core i9-9900KS	93.03%	Coffee Lake-R	8/16	4.0 / 5.0 GHz	127W
Core i5-10600K	93.02%	Comet Lake	6/12	4.1 / 4.8 GHz	125W
Threadripper 3970X	92.40%	Zen 2	32/64	3.7 / 4.5 GHz	280W
Threadripper 3960X	92.25%	Zen 2	24/48	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	280W
Ryzen 7 3700X	91.69%	Zen 2	8/16	3.6 / 4.4 GHz	65W
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G	91.36%	Zen 2, Vega	8/16	3.6 / 4.4 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 3300X	90.89%	Zen 2	4/8	3.8 / 4.3 GHz	65W
Ryzen 5 3600X	90.32%	Zen 2	6/12	3.8 / 4.4 GHz	95W
Threadripper 3990X	90.09%	Zen 2	64/128	2.9 / 4.3 GHz	280W
Core i3-9350KF	90.09%	Coffee Lake	4/4	4.0/4.6 GHz	91W
Core i9-9980XE	89.44%	Skylake	18/36	4.4 / 4.5 GHz	165W
Core i5-9600K	89.31%	Coffee Lake-R	6/6	3.7 / 4.6 GHz	95W
Core i7-7700K	88.21%	Kaby Lake	4/8	4.2 / 4.5 GHz	91W
Ryzen 5 3600	87.82%	Zen 2	6/12	3.6 / 4.2 GHz	65W
Xeon W-3175X	86.33%	Skylake	28/56	3.1 / 4.3 GHz	225W
Ryzen 5 3500X	84.69%	Zen 2	6/6	3.6 / 4.1 GHz	65W
Core i3-9100	82.52%	Coffee Lake-R	4/4	3.6 / 4.2 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 3100	80.81%	Zen 2	4/8	3.8 / 3.9 GHz	65W
Core i5-9400 / -9400F	80.16%	Coffee Lake	6/6	2.9 / 4.1 GHz	65W
Ryzen 9 3900	77.41%	Zen 2	12/24	3.1 / 4.3 GHz	65W
Core i3-8350K	75.63%	Coffee Lake	4/4	4.0 / – GHz	91W
Core i3-7100	75.26%	Kaby Lake	2/4	3.9 / – GHz	51W
Threadripper 2950X	74.11%	Zen +	16/32	3.5 / 4.4 GHz	180W
Threadripper 2990WX	71.28%	Zen+	32/64	3.0 / 4.2 GHz	250W
Threadripper 2970WX	71.02%	Zen +	24/48	3.0 / 4.2 GHz	250W
Ryzen 5 2600X	70.98%	Zen+	6/12	3.6 / 4.2 GHz	95W
Ryzen 5 3400G	69.17%	Zen +	4/8	3.7 / 4.2 GHz	65W
Core i5-7400	68.23%	Kaby Lake	4/4	3.0 / 3.5 GHz	65W
Ryzen 5 2400G	64.81%	Zen+	4/8	3.6 / 3.9 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 3200G	64.12%	Zen +	4/4	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 1300X	63.85%	Zen	4/4	3.5 / 3.7 GHz	65W
Ryzen 5 1600AF	62.99%	Zen	6/12	3.2 / 3.6 GHz	65W
Pentium G5600	57.99%	Coffee Lake	2/4	3.9 / – GHz	54W
Ryzen 5 1600X	57.31%	Zen	6/12	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	95W
Pentium G5400	54.73%	Coffee Lake	2/4	3.7 / – GHz	54W
Athlon 3000G	54.61%	Zen+	2/4	3.5 / – GHz	35W
Athlon 220GE	53.98%	Zen	2/4	3.4 / – GHz	35W
Pentium G4560	51.55%	Kaby Lake	2/4	3.5 / – GHz	54W
Athlon 200GE	50.02%	Zen	2/4	3.2 / – GHz	35W
AMD A10-9700	41.97%	Bristol Ridge	4/4	3.5 / 3.8 GHz	65W
Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A	18.78%	LuJiaZui	8/8	2.7 / – GHz	70W

This is our Pre-Zen 3 single-threaded ranking, which you can use to gauge relative rankings compared to the newer table above this one.

We generated the single-threaded metric via a geometric mean of performance in single-threaded LAME, Cinebench, POV-Ray, and y-cruncher applications, giving you a good idea of performance in everyday desktop PC applications.

Intel and AMD CPU Multi-Threaded Performance

CPU Multi-Threaded Benchmark Hierarchy Post-Zen 3
	Multi-Threaded App Score	CPU	Cores/Threads	Base/Boost	TDP
Threadripper 3960X	100%	Zen 2	24/48	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	280W
Ryzen 9 5950X	82.74%	Zen 3	16/32	3.4 / 4.9 GHz	105W
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X	73.07%	Zen 2	16/32	3.5 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Ryzen 9 5900X	70.87%	Zen 3	12/24	3.7 / 4.8 GHz	105W
Intel Core i9-10980XE	66.50%	Cascade Lake-X	18/36	3.0 / 4.8 GHz	165W
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X	59.75%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.6 GHz	105W
AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT	59.69%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Intel Core i9-10900K	54.16%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.7 / 5.3 GHz	125W
Intel Core i9-10850K	53.27%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.6 / 5.2 GHz	95W
Core i7-10700K	43.51%	Comet Lake	8/16	3.8 / 5.1 GHz	125W
Ryzen 7 2700X	33.33%	Zen+	8/16	3.7 / 4.3 GHz	105W
Ryzen 7 1800X	29.61%	Zen	8/16	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	95W

The multi-threaded workload column is based on performance in Cinebench, POV-ray, vray, Blender (four tests – Koro, Barcellona, Classroom, bmw27), y-cruncher, and Handbrake x264 and x265 workloads that represent performance in productivity-focused applications that tend to require more compute horsepower.

Like we see with single-threaded performance metrics, multi-threaded performance, which is a measure of a chip’s performance in applications that utilize multiple software threads, varies based upon a whole host of architectural factors. It also depends heavily upon how well the software scales with additional compute cores. As such, these results do not align perfectly based upon core/thread count, though it does serve as a decent litmus of multi-threaded performance. Be aware that architectures, caches, and interconnects profoundly impact these results, as all of these factors impact how well performance scales with additional threads. Performance rarely scales perfectly with the addition of more cores/threads, so the scaling factor of each processor architecture weighs in heavily on the value proposition of going with a higher core count processor for your specific application.

It’s noteworthy that both Ryzen 5000 chips beat out Intel’s 18-core 32-thread Core i9-10980XE, and the Ryzen 9 5900X only comes with 12 cores. Again, pay attention to TDP – the Ryzen chips have a 105W ranking while Intel is specced at 165W.

CPU Multi-Threaded Benchmark Hierarchy Pre-Zen 3
	Multi-Threaded App Score	Architecture	Cores/Threads	Base/Boost	TDP
Threadripper 3990X	100.0%	Zen 2	64/128	2.9 / 4.3 GHz	280W
Threadripper 3970X	83.76%	Zen 2	32/64	3.7 / 4.5 GHz	280W
Threadripper 3960X	72.04%	Zen 2	24/48	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	280W
Xeon W-3175X	69.92%	Skylake	28/56	3.1 / 4.3 GHz	225W
Ryzen 9 3950X	53.48%	Zen 2	16/32	3.5 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Core i9-10980XE	52.75%	Cascade Lake-X	18/36	3.0 / 4.8 GHz	165W
Core i9-9980XE	52.14%	Skylake	18/36	4.4 / 4.5 GHz	165W
Threadripper 2990WX	48.00%	Zen+	32/64	3.0 / 4.2 GHz	250W
Ryzen 9 3900X	44.64%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.6 GHz	105W
Ryzen 9 3900XT	44.55%	Zen 2	12/24	3.8 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Threadripper 2970WX	44.26%	Zen +	24/48	3.0 / 4.2 GHz	250W
Core i9-10900K	40.39%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.7 / 5.3 GHz	125W
Core i9-10850K	38.89%	Comet Lake	10/20	3.6 / 5.2 GHz	95W
Threadripper 2950X	39.51%	Zen +	16/32	3.5 / 4.4 GHz	180W
Ryzen 9 3900	38.34%	Zen 2	12/24	3.1 / 4.3 GHz	65W
Ryzen 7 3800XT	33.36%	Zen 2	8/16	3.9 / 4.7 GHz	105W
Core i9-9900KS	33.36%	Coffee Lake-R	8/16	4.0 / 5.0 GHz	127W
Ryzen 7 3800X	33.11%	Zen 2	8/16	3.9 / 4.5 GHz	105W
Core i7-10700K	32.87%	Comet Lake	8/16	3.8 / 5.1 GHz	125W
Core i9-9900K	32.69%	Coffee Lake-R	8/16	3.6 / 5.0 GHz	95W
Ryzen 7 3700X	32.56%	Zen 2	8/16	3.6 / 4.4 GHz	65W
Core i7-10700/F	32.05%	Comet Lake	8/16	2.9 / 4.8 GHz	65W
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G	31.21%	Zen 2, Vega	8/16	3.6 / 4.4 GHz	65W
Core i7-9700K	27.01%	Coffee Lake-R	8/8	3.6 / 4.9 GHz	95W
Ryzen 5 3600XT	26.71%	Zen 2	6/12	3.8 / 4.5 GHz	95W
Ryzen 5 3600X	25.88%	Zen 2	6/12	3.8 / 4.4 GHz	95W
Ryzen 5 3600	25.58%	Zen 2	6/12	3.6 / 4.2 GHz	65W
Core i5-10600K	25.18%	Comet Lake	6/12	4.1 / 4.8 GHz	125W
Ryzen 5 2600X	20.10%	Zen+	6/12	3.6 / 4.2 GHz	95W
Core i5-9600K	20.04%	Coffee Lake-R	6/6	3.7 / 4.6 GHz	95W
Ryzen 3 3300X	19.03%	Zen 2	4/8	3.8 / 4.3 GHz	65W
Ryzen 5 3500X	18.94%	Zen 2	6/6	3.6 / 4.1 GHz	65W
Core i5-9400 / -9400F	18.12%	Coffee Lake	6/6	2.9 / 4.1 GHz	65W
Core i7-7700K	17.77%	Kaby Lake	4/8	4.2 / 4.5 GHz	91W
Ryzen 5 1600AF	17.72%	Zen	6/12	3.2 / 3.6 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 3100	17.23%	Zen 2	4/8	3.8 / 3.9 GHz	65W
Ryzen 5 1600X	16.94%	Zen	6/12	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	95W
Core i3-9350KF	14.52%	Coffee Lake	4/4	4.0/4.6 GHz	91W
Ryzen 5 3400G	13.83%	Zen +	4/8	3.7 / 4.2 GHz	65W
Core i3-9100	13.03%	Coffee Lake-R	4/4	3.6 / 4.2 GHz	65W
Ryzen 5 2400G	12.93%	Zen+	4/8	3.6 / 3.9 GHz	65W
Core i3-8350K	12.79%	Coffee Lake	4/4	4.0 / – GHz	91W
Core i3-8100	11.90%	Coffee Lake	4/4	3.6 / – GHz	65W
Core i5-7400	10.97%	Kaby Lake	4/4	3.0 / 3.5 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 3200G	10.61%	Zen +	4/4	3.6 / 4.0 GHz	65W
Ryzen 3 1300X	9.85%	Zen	4/4	3.5 / 3.7 GHz	65W
Core i3-7100	8.53%	Kaby Lake	2/4	3.9 / – GHz	51W
Pentium G5600	6.84%	Coffee Lake	2/4	3.9 / – GHz	54W
Athlon 3000G	6.59%	Zen+	2/4	3.5 / – GHz	35W
Athlon 220GE	6.46%	Zen	2/4	3.4 / – GHz	35W
Pentium G5400	6.42%	Coffee Lake	2/4	3.7 / – GHz	54W
Athlon 200GE	6.11%	Zen	2/4	3.2 / – GHz	35W
Pentium G4560	6.07%	Kaby Lake	2/4	3.5 / – GHz	54W
AMD A10-9700	5.45%	Bristol Ridge	4/4	3.5 / 3.8 GHz	65W
Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A	5.09%	LuJiaZui	8/8	2.7 / – GHz	70W

This is our Pre-Zen 3 single-threaded ranking, which you can use to gauge relative rankings compared to the newer table above this one. The multi-threaded workload column is based on performance in Cinebench, POV-ray, vray, Blender, y-cruncher, and Handbrake x264 and x265 workloads represent performance in productivity-focused applications that tend to require more compute horsepower.

The Threadripper rankings need a bit of explanation. With an industry-leading slathering of core counts, these processors offer the utmost performance in many different threaded workloads, but can suffer in some less-demanding desktop PC-class applications that either don’t utilize the cores and threads fully, or aren’t optimized for the architecture. That reduces the gap separating the rankings in the mainstream applications we use for this list, but in many cases, you can see much larger deltas with specific applications. You should view individual reviews and our best processors for applications list for a better sense of how those processors fare in professional workloads.

Test System and Configuration

Hardware
AMD Socket AM4 (400-Series)	AMD Ryzen 2000- 3000- 5000- series processors
	MSI MEG X570 Godlike
	2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600
Intel LGA 1151 (Z370)	Intel Coffee Lake processors
	MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
	2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600
AMD Socket AM4 (300-Series)	Ryzen 1000-series processors
	MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium
	2x 8GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 @ DDR4-2667
Intel LGA 1151 (Z270)	Intel Kaby Lake processors
	MSI Z270 Gaming M7
	2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600
Intel LGA 2066	Intel Skylake processors
	MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC
	2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600
All	EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FE
	1TB Samsung PM863
	SilverStone ST1500-TI, 1500W
	Windows 10 Creators Update Version 1703 – All Spectre and Meltdown mitigations
Cooling	Corsair H115i

Legacy Desktop Processor Hierarchy

Recognizing that a lot of older platforms are going to be paired with graphics subsystems multiple generations old, we wanted to define the top of our range to encourage balance between host processing and complementary GPUs. At this point, anyone with a Sandy Bridge-based Core i7 would realize a gain from stepping up to Coffee Lake or Kaby Lake, for example. And putting AMD’s top FX CPUs next to a handful of Core i7s and those older Core i5s represents an upgrade to their status.

Currently, our hierarchy consists of 13 total tiers. The bottom half of the chart is largely outdated; you’ll notice those CPUs dragging down performance in the latest games, regardless of the graphics card installed in your PC. If you own a CPU in that range, an upgrade could really take your experience to another level.

Really, it’s the top five tiers or so that remain viable. And in that top half of the chart, an upgrade is typically worthwhile if it’s a least a couple of tiers higher. Otherwise, there’s just not enough improvement to warrant the expense of a fresh CPU, motherboard and RAM (not to mention the graphics card and storage solution you’d be considering as well).

Legacy Desktop Processor Hierarchy
Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Core i7-8700K ($382.00 On Walmart)
Intel Core i9-7900X ($969.00 On Walmart)
Intel Core i9-7960X ($1617.83 On Amazon)
Intel Core i9-7980XE ($1579.99 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-8700K ($382.00 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-7740X ($350.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-7700K ($344.61 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-7820X ($599.99 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X ($77.99 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-7700 ($317.07 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X ($199.99 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-8400 ($204.29 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen 7 1800X ($220.79 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-7800X ($389.99 On Newegg)	AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X ($549.99 On Newegg)
Intel Core i7-7700T ($339.99 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen 7 1700X ($163.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-6950X ($1576.52 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen 7 1700 ($219.79 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-6900K ($788.00 On Amazon)	AMD Ryzen 5 1600X ($139.95 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-6850K ($492.75 On Amazon)	AMD Ryzen 5 1600 ($103.57 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-6800K ($347.88 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen 5 1500X ($127.00 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-6700K ($293.19 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen 5 1400 ($139.99 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7 6700 ($317.97 On Walmart)	AMD Ryzen 3 1300X ($66.56 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-5960X ($1,069.95 On Newegg)	Ryzen 5 2400G ($59.99 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-5930K ($386.59 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-5820K ($350.90 On Walmart)
Intel Core i7-5775C ($1077.88 On Amazon)
Intel i7-4960X ($465.58 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-4930K
Intel Core i7-4820K
Intel Core i7-4790K
Intel Core i7-4770K
Intel Core i7-4790
Intel Core i7-4771
Intel Core i7-4770
Intel Core i7-3970X
Intel Core i7-3960X
Intel Core i7-3930K
Intel Core i7-3820
Intel Core i7-3770K
Intel Core i7-3770
Intel Core i5-7640X ($243.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-7600K ($10.73 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-7600 ($269.99 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-7500 ($216.62 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-7400 ($201.30 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5 6600k ($248.73 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-6600 ($210.66 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-6500 ($210.04 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5 6402P ($488.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-6400 ($182.99 On Newegg)
Intel Core i5-5675C
Intel Core i5-4690K ($250.58 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-4670K
Intel Core i5-4590
Intel Core i5-4670
Intel Core i5-4570
Intel BX80646I54460 ($215.17 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-4440
Intel Core i5-4430
Intel Core i5-3570K
Intel Core i5-3570
Intel Core i5-3550

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Core i7-990X Extreme
Intel Core i7-980X Extreme
Intel Core i7-975 Extreme
Intel Core i7-2600K
Intel Core i7-2600
Intel Core i7-965
Intel Core i5-3470
Intel Core i5-3450P	Intel Core i7-7700 ($317.07 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-3450	AMD FX-9370 ($232.17 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-3350P	AMD FX-8370 ($220.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-3330	AMD FX-8350 w/Wraith ($159.99 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-2550K	AMD FX-8320 ($124.99 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-2500K	AMD FX-8300 ($99.99 On Amazon)
Intel Core i5-2500	AMD FX-8150
Intel Core i5-2450P
Intel Core i5-2400
Intel Core i5-2380P
Intel Core i5-2320
Intel Core i5-2310
Intel Core i5-2300
Intel Core i3-7350K ($167.99 On Walmart)
Intel Core i3-7320 ($295.22 On Walmart)
Intel Core i3-7300 ($169.89 On B&H)
Intel Core i3-7100 ($131.99 On B&H)

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Core i7-980
Intel Core i7-970
Intel Core i7-960
Intel Core i7-875K
Intel Core i7-870
Intel Core i3 6320 ($218.52 On Amazon)
Intel Core i3 6300 ($130.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i3-6100 ($130.34 On Walmart)	AMD FX-6350 w/Wraith ($134.99 On Amazon)
Intel Core i3 6100T ($136.99 On Tiger Direct)	AMD FX-4350 ($716.00 On Walmart)
Intel Core i3-6098P ($372.00 On Amazon)	AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition
Intel Core i3-4360	AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition
Intel Core i3-4350	AMD Phenom II X4 Black Edition 980
Intel Core i3-4340	AMD Phenom II X4 Black Edition 975
Intel Core i3-4170
Intel Core i3-4160
Intel Core i3-4150
Intel Core i3-4130
Intel Core i3-3250
Intel Core i3-3245
Intel Core i3-3240
Intel Core i3-3225
Intel Core i3-3220
Intel Core i3-3210
Intel Core i3-2130
Intel Core i3-2025
Intel Core i3-2120
Intel Core i3-2105
Intel Core i3-2100
Intel Pentium G4620 ($143.92 On Walmart)
Intel Pentium G4600 ($126.42 On Walmart)
Intel Pentium G4560 ($79.99 On Walmart)
Intel Pentium G4500 ($74.86 On Walmart)
Intel Pentium G4400 ($62.24 On Walmart)

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
	AMD FX-8370E ($310.09 On Amazon)
	AMD FX-8320 ($149.01 On Amazon)
	AMD FX-8120
	AMD FX-6300 ($89.98 On Amazon)
	AMD FX-6200
	AMD FX-4300 ($99.95 On Amazon)
	AMD FX-4170
	AMD Phenom II X6 1075T
Intel Core i7-950	AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition
Intel Core i7-940	AMD Phenom II X4 965
Intel Core i7-930	AMD Phenom II X4 955
Intel Core i7-920	AMD A10-7890K APU ($411.00 On Amazon)
Intel Core i7-860	Intel A10-7870K ($34.99 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-3220T	AMD A10-7860K ($42.90 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-2405S	AMD A10-7850K
Intel Core i5-2400S	AMD A10-7800
Intel Core i5-760	AMD A10-7700K
Intel Core i5-750	AMD A10-6800K
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775	AMD A10-6790K
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770	AMD A10-6700
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650	AMD A10-5800K
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650	AMD A10-5700
	Intel A8-7650K ($105.99 On Amazon)
	AMD A8-7600 ($17.99 On eBay)
	AMD A8-6600K
	AMD A8-5600K
	AMD A8-3870K
	AMD A8-3870
	AMD A8-3850
	AMD Athlon X4 880K ($74.90 On Amazon)
	Intel Athlon X4 870K (4th quarter) ($35.79 On Walmart)
	Intel A10-7870K ($34.99 On Walmart)
	AMD Athlon X4 750K
	AMD Athlon X4 740
	AMD Athlon X4 651K
	AMD Athlon X4 645
	AMD Athlon X4 641
	AMD Athlon X4 640

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
	AMD FX-6100
	AMD FX-4130
	AMD FX-4100
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850	AMD Phenom II X6 1055T
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800	AMD Phenom II X6 1045T
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550	AMD Phenom II X4 945
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450	AMD Phenom II X4 940
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400	AMD Phenom II X4 920
Intel Core i5-680	AMD Phenom II X3 740
Intel Core i5-670	AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition
Intel Core i5-661	AMD A8-6500
Intel Core i5-660	AMD A8-5500
Intel Core i5-655K	AMD A6 ($75.55 On Walmart)
Intel Core i5-650	AMD A6 ($75.55 On Walmart)
Intel Core i3-2120T	AMD A6-3670K
Intel Core i3-2100T	AMD A6-3650
	AMD Athlon II X4 635
	AMD Athlon II X4 630

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500	AMD Phenom II X4 910
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400	AMD Phenom II X4 910e
Intel Core 2 Duo E7600	AMD Phenom II X4 810
Intel Core i3-550	AMD Athlon II X4 631
Intel Core i3-540	AMD Athlon II X4 620
Intel Core i3-530	AMD Athlon II X3 460
Intel Pentium G3470
Intel Pentium G3460
Intel Pentium G3450
Intel Pentium G3440
Intel Pentium G3430
Intel Pentium G3420
Intel Pentium G3260 ($106.67 On Walmart)
Intel Pentium G3258 ($67.00 On eBay)
Intel Pentium G3250
Intel Pentium G3220
Intel Pentium G2130
Intel Pentium G2120
Intel Pentium G2020
Intel Pentium G2010
Intel Pentium G870
Intel Pentium G860
Intel Pentium G850
Intel Pentium G840
Intel Pentium G645
Intel Pentium G640
Intel Pentium G630

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200
Intel Core 2 Duo E8300	AMD Phenom II X4 905e
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200	AMD Phenom II X4 805
Intel Core 2 Duo E8190	AMD Phenom II X3 710
Intel Core 2 Duo E7500	AMD Phenom II X3 705e
Intel Core 2 Duo E7400	AMD Phenom II X2 565 Black Edition
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850	AMD Phenom II X2 560 Black Edition
Intel Core 2 Duo E6750	AMD Phenom II X2 555 Black Edition
Intel Pentium G620	AMD Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition
Intel Celeron G1630	AMD Phenom II X2 545
Intel Celeron G1620	AMD Phenom X4 9950
Intel Celeron G1610	AMD Athlon II X3 455
Intel Celeron G555	AMD Athlon II X3 450
Intel Celeron G550	AMD Athlon II X3 445
Intel Celeron G540	AMD Athlon II X3 440
Intel Celeron G530	AMD Athlon II X3 435
Intel Celeron G3950 ($65.35 On Amazon)	AMD Athlon II X3 425
Intel Celeron G3930 ($61.10 On Walmart)
Intel Celeron G3930 ($61.10 On Walmart)
Intel Celeron G3900 ($47.49 On Amazon)

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
	AMD Phenom X4 9850
	AMD Phenom X4 9750
	AMD Phenom X4 9650
Intel Core 2 Duo E7300	AMD Phenom X4 9600
Intel Core 2 Duo E7200	AMD Phenom X3 8850
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700	AMD Phenom X3 8750
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550	AMD Athlon II X2 370K
Intel Core 2 Duo E6540	AMD Athlon II X2 265
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6700	AMD Athlon II X2 260
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6600	AMD Athlon II X2 255
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E650	AMD A6-5500K
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E6300	AMD A6 ($75.55 On Walmart)
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5800	AMD A4-7300 ($112.00 On Amazon)
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5700	AMD A4-6400K
Intel Pentium G9650	AMD A4-6300 ($229.99 On eBay)
	AMD A4-5400K
	AMD A4-5300
	AMD A4-4400
	AMD A4-4000
	AMD A4-3400
	AMD A4-3300
	AMD Sempron 2650 ($40.33 On Walmart)
	AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
	AMD Phenom X4 9550
	AMD Phenom X4 9500
	AMD Phenom X4 9450e
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600	AMD Phenom X4 9350e
Intel Core 2 Duo E6420	AMD Phenom X3 8650
Intel Core 2 Duo E4700	AMD Phenom X3 8600
Intel Core 2 Duo E4600	AMD Phenom X3 8550
Intel Core 2 Duo E4500	AMD Phenom X3 8450e
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5400	AMD Phenom X3 8450
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5300	AMD Phenom X3 8400
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5200	AMD Phenom X3 8250e
Intel Pentium Dual-Core G620T	AMD Athlon II X2 250
	AMD Athlon II X2 245
	AMD Athlon II X2 240
	AMD Athlon X2 7850
	AMD Athlon X2 7750
	AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+
	AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
	AMD Phenom X4 9150e
	AMD Phenom X4 9100e
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400	AMD Athlon X2 7550
Intel Core 2 Duo E6320	AMD Athlon X2 7450
Intel Core 2 Duo E4400	AMD Athlon X2 5050e
Intel Core 2 Duo E4300	AMD Athlon X2 4850e/b
Intel Celeron E3300	AMD Athlon 64 X2 5400+
	AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+
	AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+
	AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300	AMD Athlon X2 6550
Intel Core 2 Duo E5500	AMD Athlon X2 6500
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2220	AMD Athlon X2 4450e/b
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2200	AMD Athlon X2 4600+
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2210	AMD Athlon X2 4400+
Intel Celeron E3200	AMD Athlon X2 4200+
	AMD Athlon X2 BE-2400

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2180	AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+
Intel Celeron 1600	AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Intel Celeron G440	AMD Athlon X2 4050e
	AMD Athlon X2 2300 Black Edition

Intel CPUs	AMD CPUs and APUs
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2160
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E2140
Intel Celeron E1500
Intel Celeron E1400
Intel Celeron E1200

MORE: Best Gaming CPUs

MORE: Best Cheap CPUs

MORE: Best Desktop CPUs

MORE: GPU Performance Hierarchy

	Minimum	Recommended	RTX Medium	RTX Ultra
AMD processor	FX – 6300	Ryzen 5 1600 X	Ryzen 7 1800 X	Ryzen 7 3700 X
Intel processor	Core i3 – 4340	Core i5 – 2500 K	Core i7 – 8700 K	Core i9 – 9900 K
AMD card	HD 7950	RX 580	RX 6800	RX 6800 XT
NVIDIA Card	GTX 670	GTX 970	RTX 3070	RTX 3080
RAM	8 GB	12 GB	16 GB
16 GB
Disk space	175 GB	175 GB	165 GB	250 GB
Operating system	Windows 10 64 – bit	Windows 64 -bit	Windows 10 64 – bit	Windows 10 64 – bit

According to the first tests of the Notebookcheck portal, Apple Macbook Air with the ARM Apple M1 chip even reaches 50% longer battery life compared to last year’s version.

Our pick of the best Chromebooks to buy today

Pixelbook Go

Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 3

Asus Chromebook Flip C434

Acer 714 Chromebook

HP Chromebook 14 G5

Acer Chromebook 11

Asus Chromebook Flip C436

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War is based on the modified IW 8.0 engine that drove its predecessor, but introduces DLSS in addition to ray tracing.

ASUS GeForce RTX Test 3070 TUF Gaming – Non-reference Ampere

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Design and build

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Display

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Processor, graphics and storage

Intel MacBook Pro 13-inch vs Intel MacBook Air: Price

Conclusions

Here is the first Apple Silicon SoC: M1 arrives

Family of Processors of 10 to Laptop Generation

H Series for High Performance Laptops

U and Y series for versatile laptops that offer autonomy and mobility

Intel 12 a Generation H Series: Highest Performance for Gaming and Creators

Comet Lake U and Y CPU Family: Up to 6 cores in ultra-thin format

Ice Lake U and Y CPU Family: For ultra-thin and light notebooks

Three AI acceleration systems.

Intel and AMD CPU Gaming Hierarchy

Intel and AMD CPU Single-Threaded Performance Hierarchy

Intel and AMD CPU Multi-Threaded Performance

Test System and Configuration

Legacy Desktop Processor Hierarchy

1.4mm travel keyboard and Core i3 – 10100 U on the affordable Xiaomi Mi NoteBook 14 e-Learning Edition

Pablo López