Home/Component/CPU/MSI announces new Aegis, Codex, Trident and Infinite gaming PCs with Intel 11th Gen CPUs
Matthew Wilson 1 day ago CPU, Featured Tech News, Gaming PC
Earlier this week, Intel officially announced its “Rocket Lake-S” 11th Gen Core desktop processors. MSI is getting involved with the launch early, updating its gaming desktop systems with Intel’s latest hardware.
This week, MSI announced that its Aegis, Codex, Trident and Infinite series of gaming desktop PCs will ship with Intel 11th Gen Core CPUs. These gaming PCs also include RTX 30 graphics cards.
Some MSI systems will come with ‘up to an Intel Core i9-11900K’, while others offer up to Core i7 or Core i5 options. In the case of the MSI MEG Trident X 11th, Aegis RS 11th and the Infinite RS 11th PCs, you can go up to an Intel Core i9-11900K.
The MSI MPG Trident AS 11th system tops out at an Intel Core i7-11700F, while the MSI Codex R 11th and Aegis R 11th PCs come with ‘up to’ an Intel Core i7-11700. Finally the Aegis SE 11th will ship with up to an Intel Core i5-11400F.
If you are after an 11th Gen Core i9 system, then pricing starts at $1,999. MSI’s Core i7 supported systems start at $1,349.
KitGuru Says: Are any of you thinking about upgrading to one of Intel’s new Rocket Lake-S CPUs? Are you looking to buy a pre-build or are you planning on building yourself?
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Intel NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element to feature up to Intel Core i9-11980HK
Intel’s next generation NUC is coming soon and recent leaks have given us a good …
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
Any business laptop that comes out these days is entering a tough field full of very established players. The world is already stuffed full of ThinkPads and Latitudes, which have strong followings, cover price ranges across the board, and are highly attuned to what workers need.
So my question with lesser-known business laptops is usually: Where does this fit? What customer is it catering to who might be underserved by a ThinkPad?
With its TravelMate line (specifically the TravelMate P6), Acer seems to be going for two potential openings. The first is that the TravelMate is, as the name implies, specifically intended for frequent business travelers. It’s light, portable, and sturdy, at the expense of some other traits. And the second is its price. Starting at $1,199.99, the TravelMate line is targeting a more price-conscious demographic than many business laptops that would be considered “premium” are. I think the TravelMate succeeds in filling these two niches in particular. But it has some other drawbacks that make it tough to recommend for a general audience.
The aspect of the TravelMate that should be a big help to mobile business users is the port selection. Despite being quite thin, the laptop is able to fit a USB Type-C (supporting USB 3.1 Gen 2, DisplayPort, Thunderbolt 3, and USB charging), two USB 3.1 Type-A Gen 1 (one with power-off USB charging), one HDMI 2.0, one microSD reader, one combination audio jack, one Ethernet port (with a trap-door hinge), one DC-In jack for Acer’s adapter, one lock slot, and an optional SmartCard reader. The fewer dongles and docks you have to travel with, the better.
Portability is another priority here and is another one of the TravelMate’s highlight features. At just 2.57 pounds and 0.65 inches thick, the TravelMate should be a breeze to carry around in a backpack or briefcase. Acer says it’s put the product through a slew of durability tests for weight and pressure, drops, shocks, vibrations, and other hiccups you may encounter during the day.
Another area that’s likely important to some mobile professionals is videoconferencing capability. I found that to be a mixed bag here. The TravelMate’s four-microphone array had no trouble catching my voice, in both voice recognition and Zoom meeting use cases. Acer says they can pick up voices from up to 6.5 feet away. The webcam also produces a fine picture (though this unit doesn’t support Windows Hello for easy logins) and has a physical privacy shutter. The speakers are not great, though — music was tinny with thin percussion and nonexistent bass.
Acer promises that the TravelMate can survive “the bumps from airport security, accidental drops, and other mishaps.”
The TravelMate also includes some business-specific features including a TPM 2.0 chip and Acer’s ProShield security software.
In other, less business-y areas, though, the TravelMate has a few shortcomings. Shoppers looking for anything more than portability out of the chassis may be disappointed. While most of the TravelMate is made of magnesium-aluminum alloy, it has a bit of a plasticky feel — and while the keyboard is sturdy, there’s considerable flex in the screen. And then there’s the aesthetic: the P6 is far from the prettiest computer you can buy for $1,199.99. It’s almost entirely black, with very few accents (and the ones it has are a drab gray color). And the bezels around the 16:9 screen are quite chunky by modern standards. Plus, the 16:9 aspect ratio is falling out of fashion for a reason — it’s cramped for multitasking, especially on a 13- or 14-inch screen — and the panel maxed out at 274 nits in my testing, which is a bit too dim for outdoor use.
The color is called “mild black.”
The TravelMate looks and feels like it was made a bit better than budget fare. But it also looks and feels closer to an Aspire 5 than it does to a top ThinkPad. For context, you can get an Aspire 5 with identical specs to this TravelMate model for just over $700. Another comparison: the Swift 5, a gorgeous consumer laptop that’s even lighter than the TravelMate, can be purchased with comparable specs for just $999.99. This is all to emphasize that you’re sacrificing a bit of build quality (as well as some extra money) for the TravelMate’s weight and business-specific offerings.
The touchpad is also not my favorite. For one, I had some palm-rejection issues. Those didn’t interfere with my work per se, but it was still unnerving to see my cursor jumping around the screen while I was typing. In addition, the touchpad on my unit had a bit of give before the actuation point, meaning one click required me to make (and hear) what felt like two clicks. And its off-center placement meant that I was constantly right-clicking when I meant to left-click, and I had to consciously reach over to the left side in order to click with my right hand. Finally, the click itself is shallow and far from the most comfortable.
I also didn’t love the power button. It contains a fingerprint sensor, which worked quite well. But the button itself is stiff and very shallow. I know this sounds like a small nitpick, but it was really irksome and made turning the TravelMate on in the morning more of a hassle than it could’ve been.
Some TravelMate models support facial recognition, but my model did not.
The TravelMate model that I received to review is sold out everywhere I’ve looked as of this writing. The closest model to it is listed at $1,199.99 (though it’s cheaper through some retailers) and comes with a Core i5-10310U, 8GB of RAM, and 256GB of SSD storage. My unit is the same, but it has a Core i5-10210U. Those processors don’t have a significant performance difference, so my testing here should give you a good idea of what to expect from that model. You can also buy a model with a Core i7-10610U, 16GB of memory, and a 512GB SSD for $1,399.99. Both configurations run Windows 10 Pro and include a 1920 x 1080 non-touch display.
For my office workload of emails, spreadsheets, Zoom calls, etc., the TravelMate did just fine. I sometimes heard the fans spinning at times when my load wasn’t super heavy, but the noise wasn’t loud enough to be a problem. Note that this processor has Intel’s UHD graphics, rather than its upgraded Iris Xe graphics, which means the system wouldn’t be a good choice for gaming, video software, or other graphics work.
But there’s one area where the TravelMate really impressed, and it’s one that’s quite useful for travelers: battery life. Running through my daily workload at 200 nits of brightness, my system averaged nine hours and 15 minutes of continuous use. That’s almost twice what the budget Aspire 5 got with my same workload. It also beats the Swift 5 and the pricier ThinkPad X1 Nano. If your workload is similar to (or lighter than) mine, you should be able to bring this device around an airport or conference for a full work day without being attached to a wall.
The notebook can charge up to 50 percent in less than 45 minutes.
One performance complaint, though: this thing comes with bloatware. My unit was pre-installed with all kinds of junk, including games (Amazon was pinned to the taskbar) and other software like Dropbox. Most annoyingly, it came with Norton, which bugged me with annoying pop-ups all the time and also seemed to impact battery life: the TravelMate consistently lasted around an hour longer after I uninstalled the program. It doesn’t take too long to uninstall everything, but I’m still morally put off by the idea of so much cheap crapware being loaded onto a laptop that costs over $1,000. And it’s especially troubling to see on a business laptop, because it can expose users to cybersecurity risk.
The TravelMate line is filling a pretty specific niche, and it fills it just fine. If you’re a frequent business traveler who needs a light device with plentiful ports and all-day battery life, you’re shopping in the $1,199 price range, and you’re willing to overlook a mediocre touchpad, dim 16:9 display, and other hiccups, then the P6 will be a better choice for you than something like a pricier and heavier Dell Latitude or the shorter-lived and port-starved ThinkPad X1 Nano.
That said, the P6 has enough drawbacks that I think the bulk of customers would be better served by other laptops. Those who like the Acer brand may like some of Acer’s other offerings — especially those who don’t need the business-specific security features. The Swift 5 is lighter, nicer-looking, and more affordable than the TravelMate, with a better touchpad, screen, and processor. And budget shoppers can find much of what the TravelMate offers in any number of cheaper laptops. The Aspire 5 and the Swift 3 don’t have the TravelMate’s battery or port selection, but they do improve upon its touchpad, audio (in the Aspire’s case), and looks (in the Swift’s case). And, of course, there’s a litany of other laptops in this price range — from HP’s Spectre x360 to Dell’s XPS 13 — that are excellent in almost every way and also offer 3:2 screens.
Ultimately, the TravelMate isn’t a bad laptop — but if it’s the best laptop for you, you probably know who you are.
NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element (Image credit: Chiphell)
The Intel NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element (codename Driver Bay) might be right around the corner. A user from the Chiphell forums has shared a screenshot of the alleged specifications for the device, which appears to leverage Intel’s forthcoming 11th Generation Tiger Lake-H 45W chips.
If the information is legit, the NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element will be available with three processor options that may come in the shape of the Core i9-11980HK, Core i7-11800H or Core i5-11400H. The Core i9 and Core i7 Tiger Lake-H 45W chips will arrive with eight Willow Cove cores, while the Core i5 will stick to six cores. All three have Hyper-Threading technology, of course.
The NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element can be outfitted with up to 64GB of DDR4-3200 dual-channel memory. It also comes equipped with three PCIe 4.0 x4 M.2 slots with support for M.2 drives up to 80mm in length. One of the M.2 slots communicates directly with the Tiger Lake-H processor, while the remaining two are attached to the PCH itself. There is support for RAID 0 and RAID 1 arrays. The unit is compatible with Intel’s Optane Memory as well.
NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element (Image credit: Chiphell)
If the Tiger Lake-H chip isn’t paired with a discrete graphics option, then the Xe LP graphics engine will do all the heavy lifting. The NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element provides one HDMI 2.0b port and two Thunderbolt 4 ports so you can connect up to three 4K monitors to the device.
Depending on the SKU, the NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element may sport 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet and/or 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports. It also offers Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5 connectivity.
The NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element may be a tiny device, but it supplies plenty of USB ports. There are a total of six USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-A ports as well as two USB 3.1 headers and two USB 2.0 headers. Its audio capabilities include 7.1 multichannel audio that’s made possible through the HDMI or DisplayPort signals.
Since the NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element is based on Tiger Lake-H 45W processors, it’s reasonable to expect the device to hit the market once Intel officially launches the aforementioned chips. Tiger Lake-H 45W laptops are expected to land in the second quarter of this year so the NUC 11 Extreme Compute Element shouldn’t be far behind.
(Pocket-lint) – The HP Spectre x360 13 is a bit of a dream convertible laptop. Not much has changed in this 2020-2021 version apart from a shift to Intel’s 11th Gen processors. But these bring a significant jump in performance, especially for gaming, with no downsides.
You have plenty of laptops to choose from with this much cash to spend. You could get a (admittedly non-convertible) MacBook Air, a Dell XPS 13 2-in-1, or a Lenovo Yoga 9i (although the Shadow Black model we saw we can’t recommend).
Particular benefits of the HP Spectre x360 13 include an ultra-small footprint, a near-perfect hinge design that’s far more sturdy than most, and a great keyboard. This is a style laptop that doesn’t compromise on the basics, and that matters because no matter how expensive a laptop looks or feels, you always take the outer gloss for granted quickly enough.
Design
Dimensions: 16.9 x 194.5 x 306mm
Weight: 1.3kg (1.28kg measured)
Unibody aluminium shell
HP Spectre laptops are some of the most striking, and perhaps contentious, slim-and-light models we review all year. The HP Spectre x360 13’s look hasn’t changed much in this latest generation, but is still worth a mention.
Pocket-lint
It has a thing for angles – like the 45-degree cut-outs in the corners, and peaked contoured edges. It all gives the Spectre x360 a distinct and angular appearance – but not one that all will instantly like. However, HP tempers the look by keeping everything bar the screen border a sedate silver. A couple more striking two-tone finishes are available if you want to fully embrace the Spectre’s provocative style.
All the HP Spectre x360 13’s panels are aluminium, rather than magnesium. HP could have used the latter to bring the weight below its currently perfectly respectable ~1.3kg. But then you’d lose some of the cool, metallic feel that works hand-in-hand with the laptop’s severe look.
The Spectre x360 13’s build is exceptional too. There is zero keyboard flex, real Apple-grade rigidity, and the integrity of the flippy hinge is best-in-class stuff.
Pocket-lint
Use the rival Samsung Galaxy Book Flex 2 on your knees and you’ll notice the screen actually wobbles slightly from the motion. There’s almost none of that in the Spectre x360.
However, the HP’s footprint is actually one of the most notable things here. The Spectre x360 is tiny for a 13-inch machine, shaving off a significant amount of depth. Some of you won’t appreciate this as much as the sub-1kg weight of lighter alternatives. But it helps this laptop fit in smaller bags or onto cramped tables.
Screen
13-inch IPS LCD touchscreen with stylus support
Full HD resolution (1920 x 1080 pixels)
100% sRGB colour, 460-nit brightness
Part of this footprint is down to HP’s cutting down of the screen border at the bottom edge. And, of course, because the HP Spectre x360 13 has a widescreen display rather than the 3:2 aspect ratio some prefer for productivity apps.
Pocket-lint
Are you in that crowd? HP caters for you too, now. Hunt down the 14-inch version of the HP Spectre x360 13, which trades the small footprint for more screen space and a larger touchpad. Yes, a “14 13”, weird naming, isn’t it?
HP sent us the “entry-level” screen version of the HP Spectre x360 13. It has a Full HD IPS LCD screen, rather than the 4K OLED you can get if you’re willing to spend more (and probably sacrifice battery life as a result)
This LCD isn’t a true wide colour gamut screen – but we still think it is great. It delivers very high contrast for this style of display, making blacks look rich and deep even when the brightness is maxed. And that top brightness is high enough to work outdoors comfortably enough.
Resolution is the one obvious shortfall. While 1080p lets you see slight pixellation in text – which is why you might choose to buy a MacBook Air instead – it’s still not a low resolution per se. Where almost all Windows laptops of this type offer 1080p as a starting resolution, and an ultra-high res one as a pricey upgrade, all MacBook Air models have 1600p screens, which wipe out that slight pixellation.
Pocket-lint
The HP Spectre x360 13 also supports a digitiser stylus, with pressure sensitivity. Looking online, it seems you may get one in the box with some packages, but ours didn’t include the stylus (based in the UK, so it may be a regional thing). This doesn’t seem as essential an accessory as it does in the Lenovo Yoga 9i, though, as there’s nowhere to store then pen in the laptop itself.
Keyboard and Touchpad
2-level backlight
Textured glass touchpad
The HP Spectre x360 13 is at heart a pretty straightforward laptop. It’s a good job, then, that HP has the basics aced.
Pocket-lint
For one, it has a very good keyboard. There’s plenty of key travel, zero flex to the keyboard plate, and meaty-but-quiet feedback when you press the keys. This is not necessarily what you’d expect from a style-driven portable laptop in 2021. But HP has not forgotten this element is pretty important for those who actually work eight hours a day in front of the thing.
There’s a two-level backlight for confidence when typing in darker rooms. And the only concession to the Spectre’s low-depth case design is that a row of function buttons are shifted to the right of the keyboard. We guarantee you’ll press Page Up/Down accidentally a hundred times, but you’ll get used to the layout in the end.
The touchpad is trimmed down more substantially to fit the Spectre x360 13’s shape, but is still very good. It has a smooth textured glass surface, and a confident clicker that isn’t affected by pressure places around the pad itself.
Pocket-lint
There’s a hint of pre-click float, which is usually something to complain about. But here it actually seems deliberate, to lend the pad a greater sense of click depth.
The HP Spectre x360 13 also has a little fingerprint scanner, below the arrow keys. It is not as subtle as a pad built into a keyboard key or a power button, but then HP doesn’t exactly have much space to work with here and its responsiveness is sound enough. Plus, as you can see, subtlety isn’t the name of the game when it comes to design.
There’s also, sadly, no room for a good webcam. A 720p camera sits in the screen surround, and it doles out a soft, noisy image like the vast majority of laptops in this class. Puts it on par with a MacBook then, but that’s another way of saying it’s not nearly good enough for this day and age.
Performance
Intel Core i7-1165g7 CPU
16GB DDR4 RAM
512GB Intel Optane SSD
The HP Spectre x360 13 is an Intel Evo laptop. This is a new quality seal from Intel that ensures you get quick-resume from sleep, a Thunderbolt 4 port, fairly fast charging, and good battery life too. And it all revolves around Intel’s 11th Gen processors.
Pocket-lint
Our HP Spectre x360 13 has an Intel Core i7-1165g7 processor with 16GB RAM and a 512GB Intel Optane SSD. This makes Windows 10 fly. And while it doesn’t quite have the raw power of the MacBook Pro’s M1 processor, there are not going to be any compatibility headaches – as this is a more conventional CPU.
Gaming is the most noticeable performance improvement you’ll see in this generation. Laptops like this traditionally use the graphics chipset baked into the main processor, and Intel’s traditionally are not all that good. But the HP Spectre x360 13 has the Intel Xe chipset, which brings performance up to that of an entry-level Nvidia dedicated graphics card.
We’ve tested a bunch of laptops with Xe graphics recently. They let you play Skyrim at Ultra graphics settings, Subnautica at a fairly pretty Medium, Euro Truck Simulator 2 with everything turned on, and Kingdom Come: Deliverance at 900p with good results.
How about GTA V? That runs just fine too, delivering frame rates in the 40s at the default graphics settings. Intel has finally caught up with AMD, delivering results similar to what you’d see in a Ryzen 7 4700U laptop – like the Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 – or a last-gen Intel one with a dedicated Nvidia MX350 graphics card.
Pocket-lint
We’ve been waiting for this moment for ages: you can treat a laptop like the HP Spectre x360 13 a bit like a last-gen games console, even though it is not remotely made for the purpose.
The HP Spectre x360 13 is also silent when you do light work that doesn’t tax the processor, causing the fans to start spinning. These latest-generation chipsets seem to have a better handle on heat than their predecessors. It’s not silent when you run GTA V, of course, but avoids the annoying high-pitch whirr you sometimes get with small laptops.
The HP Spectre x360 13’s speakers are reasonable, but not quite as the same level as those of a MacBook Pro or Lenovo Yoga 9i. There’s the small portion of bass that largely separates good speakers from poor ones and the tone is even enough, but maximum volume doesn’t break out of the so-so laptop mould.
Battery Life
60Wh battery
65W charger
USB-C charging
The HP Spectre x360 13 has a 60Wh battery – the same size this series has used for a few generations now. It’s a mid-size battery – which is no surprise given the laptop’s footprint – but lasts very well considering the laptop uses an Intel CPU, which aren’t quite as frugal on power as the latest AMD Ryzen models.
Best laptop 2021: Top general and premium notebooks for working from home and more
By Dan Grabham
·
Pocket-lint
In our hands it lasted 12 hours 15 minutes when streaming video over Wi-Fi at the sort of brightness level you might use indoors. Not bad, right? The Intel Evo mark guarantees nine hours of general use, so the HP Spectre x360 13 is a good way ahead of that.
Its charger is a 65W brick – uh oh, it’s not exactly in keeping with the laptop’s elegant style – but at least it’ll bring the charge to around 50 per cent in a mere half-hour.
Verdict
The HP Spectre x360 13 is a laptop focused on quality. Its build is exceptional. You get the cool and hard feel of aluminium, very low-flex panels and a non-wobbly convertible display hinge. Its keyboard is far better than the thin, clicky designs used in plenty of slim laptops. And while the weight isn’t dramatically low, this laptop’s footprint is among the smallest in its class.
Sure, you don’t get a slot-in stylus and for the deepest display colour you’ll need to upgrade to the 4K OLED version, but HP has aced the parts that affect your day-to-day experience using this machine. Don’t be confused by the funky angular design, HP knows the importance of getting the basics right. Oh, and it costs less than the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1, which is an added bonus. It’s top marks all round.
View offer on HP Store (sponsored link)
Also consider
Dell XPS 13 2-in-1
squirrel_widget_167666
It’s pricier for the same spec, but you have to pay big to get the comparable Dell XPS convertible. It also has a shallower keyboard and a larger footprint, although the touchpad is a lot bigger too, which may appeal.
Read our review
MacBook Air
squirrel_widget_334337
Apple doesn’t make a convertible laptop – but the Air is probably the laptop you might consider in this HP’s stead. It has a sharper display and doesn’t use a fan at all, so stays silent 24/7. However, the keyboard is shallower, which may be an issue for those who spend a lot of typing tapping out emails and docs.
Intel’s new Rocket Lake processors are its big answer to AMD’s Ryzen 5000 chips, and on the face of it, this is going to be a very interesting face-off once the embargo is lifted on reviews. That’s because, rather than follow the trend of more cores and a denser architecture, Intel has actually reduced the number of cores.
Intel claims that this change will lead to a 19% improvement in instruction per cycle (IPC) throughput and can lead to max speeds of 5.3GHz.
Alongside improved performance (at least in applications that aren’t heavily threaded), Rocket Lake will also include PCIe 4.0 interface adoption, AVX-512 support and a claimed 50% increase in Xe-powered integrated graphics performance.
For more in-depth coverage, check out our Intel Rocket Lake CPU news article from our CPU expert Paul Alcorn.
If you’re convinced, though, we’ve set up this page to collect all the different places where you can buy or pre-order a Rocket Lake CPU.
Intel Core i5-11600K: Where to Buy
(Image credit: Future)
US Intel Core i5-11600K retailers at a glance: Amazon | Best Buy | Micro Center | Newegg
Pricing across pre-order pages has been pretty inconsistent, which follows reports that some MSRPs are being jacked up for Intel’s 11th Gen CPUs. The best price comes from Best Buy, which is offering the i5-11600K for $269.99, whereas the most expensive is Micro Center at $319.
Intel Core i7-11700K: Where to Buy
(Image credit: Future)
US Intel Core i7-11700K retailers at a glance: Amazon | Best Buy | Micro Center | Newegg
When it comes to the 11th Gen i7 CPU, Newegg has the best price at $399 ($30 off), but once again there is a wide swath of pricing. The most expensive is Micro Center at $519, with Amazon and Best Buy in the middle at $418 and $419 respectively.
Also, if you don’t necessarily need an unlocked processor, you can get the standard 11700K from Newegg for $32 less.
Intel Core i9-11900K: Where to Buy
(Image credit: Future)
US Intel Core i9-11900K retailers at a glance: Amazon | Best Buy | Newegg
The 11th Gen i9 is where pre-ordering starts to get a little tricky, as it hasn’t actually started yet! The product pages are live, so keep checking back as you may get lucky.
As far as pricing goes, Amazon’s cost is not available yet, but the cheapest is Best Buy at $549. Newegg offers the CPU at a far pricier $613.
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
If you’ve used a ThinkPad before, you probably know 90 percent of what to expect from the ThinkPad X1 Nano. All of the staples are here. It’s got the black carbon fiber chassis, the discrete buttons on top of the touchpad, the mechanical privacy shutter, the ThinkPad logo on the palm rest, and (of course) the red pointer nub in the middle of the keyboard.
But one thing is unique about the X1 Nano: it’s the lightest ThinkPad Lenovo has ever made. Starting at just 1.99 pounds, the Nano isn’t technically the lightest laptop on the market. But it’s still one of the best combinations of portability, build quality, and performance that you can buy.
Lenovo has made a few other useful tweaks as well, though they’re not tweaks you’ll necessarily notice when you’re looking at the machine. There’s not much to overthink here: it’s a smaller, lighter ThinkPad. Lenovo didn’t reinvent the wheel, but the updates it made succeed in keeping the Nano current among its rapidly innovating peers.
The keyboard is “nearly full-sized.”
Here’s what’s new with the Nano, in addition to its lightweight build. It has a 16:10 screen, a feature that a number of this year’s ThinkPads are adopting for the first time. It has a new 11th Gen Intel processor, and it’s certified through Intel’s Evo program (which is the chipmaker’s way of verifying that a laptop includes its latest features like Thunderbolt 4, Wi-Fi 6, instant wake, and fast charging). And there are a few enhanced security features, including a match-on-chip fingerprint reader and a dTPM 2.0 chip, which will mostly be notable for business users.
What looms over that verdict, of course, is the Nano’s price. Technically, it starts at $2,499 and maxes out at $3,719. The good news is that Lenovo’s products are very often heavily discounted, and the current sale prices at the time of publish range from $1,149 to $2,231.
The Nano is highly customizable. It comes with a Core i5-1130G7, a Core i5-1140G7, a Core i7-1160G7, or a Core i7-1180G7, all of which support Intel’s vPro. You can also select 8GB or 16GB of RAM, 256GB through 1TB of SSD storage, and a touchscreen or non-touch screen (both with 2160 x 1350 resolution). There’s even a Linux option. My review model (which runs Windows 10 Pro) is in the middle, with a quad-core Core i7-1160G7, 16GB of memory, 512GB of storage, and the non-touch display. Folks interested in the touchscreen should note that those models are heavier (2.14 pounds) and a bit thicker as well.
You’re paying a premium for the Nano’s weight and the extra business features. A comparable Dell XPS 13 to my test model, for example, is $1,599.99 and 2.64 pounds (over half a pound heavier than this unit).
That said, the Nano’s weight is astounding. I feel like I’m carrying nothing while I’m holding it, even one-handed. I’d easily haul it in my purse or throw it into my backpack and forget that it’s there. For a few comparisons: it’s half a pound lighter than the ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 9. It’s close to a pound lighter than the ThinkPad X13, as well as the latest MacBook Air. These are already laptops known for their portability, and the Nano is noticeably slimmer.
The laptop achieves this without sacrificing durability, which is often a concern with ultra-light devices. The chassis feels sturdy — there’s just a tiny bit of flex in the keyboard and screen, and I’d be very comfortable jerking it around in a briefcase. Lenovo says the Nano has been “tested against 12 military-grade certification methods,” so there’s also that.
I’m also very happy with the 16:10 display, which is about the same height as a typical 14-inch 16:9 screen. In addition to the extra vertical space it provides, it’s sharper than a 1080p display, and it delivers a nice picture.
There’s also a Dolby Atmos speaker system, which includes two upward-firing and two downward-firing woofers. The laptop comes preloaded with Dolby Access, which is one of my favorite audio apps. You can swap between presets for Movies, Music, and other scenarios (as well as custom profiles), and the settings make an audible difference. You can also personalize the four-microphone array for different uses, including conference calls and voice recognition.
My one quip with the chassis is the keyboard. It’s a fine keyboard, and the little red nub is there if you want to use it. But the Fn and Ctrl keys are swapped from the locations where you’ll find them on other laptop keyboards — every time I meant to hit Ctrl, I hit Fn. After a week of use, I have not yet adjusted to this.
Now, I want to be very clear: I know this is the way ThinkPad keyboards have been laid out since the dawn of time. I also know you can swap the two keys in BIOS. Still, if you’re not currently a ThinkPad user, you should note that you’ll either need some time to get used to this keyboard layout or you’ll be using mislabeled keys.
The port selection is also limited, though that’s not unique among thin devices. You get two USB-C ports and an audio jack, and they’re all on the left side.
Performance-wise, the X1 Nano did an excellent job. It’s not what you’d want to buy for demanding tasks like heavy gaming or video editing, but it kept up with my gaggles of Chrome tabs, spreadsheets, and streaming apps without a stutter. I never heard any noise out of the machine or felt noticeable heat, even when I was running fairly taxing loads.
“Anti-fry circuitry” ensures that USB-C chargers send the correct voltage.
As mentioned earlier, the Nano has a number of new security features that are coming to 2021 ThinkPads across the line. The one I found most useful was the presence-sensing tool, which automatically locks the device when you’re not in front of it and unlocks it when you’re back. ThinkPads aren’t the only business laptops to adopt this technology, but it is convenient and worked well in my testing. You can also turn it off if it creeps you out. Elsewhere, there’s a match-on-sensor fingerprint sensor next to the touchpad (the qualifier means that fingerprint enrollment, pattern storage, and biometric matching all happens directly within the sensor). The sensor also uses AI to distinguish between real and fake fingers, in case that was a concern of yours.
The one feature that isn’t quite stellar here is the battery life. I averaged 6 hours and 38 minutes between charges with my daily workflow (around a dozen Chrome tabs with office stuff like emailing, Slack, Google Docs and Sheets, occasional Spotify and YouTube streaming, with brightness around 200 nits). That’s fine, and not unexpected since the Nano only has a 48Whr battery, but I often see over seven hours out of machines at this price. It means that if your workload is similar to mine, you may not make it through a full workday on a charge. The 65W charger took 43 minutes to juice the device up to 60 percent.
In the ThinkPad X1 Nano, Lenovo is playing to its strengths. You’re getting a comfortable keyboard and touchpad, a red nub, and a capable processor in a sturdy system that’s built to last. The Nano brings a new factor to the table — a chassis that’s (just) under two pounds. The target audience here is clear: business users who like the traditional ThinkPad look and feel and are willing to pay more for an ultralight machine.
The main compromises you’re making are the battery life and port selection. Neither of these is an absolute disaster for the Nano, but they mean that a chunk of users may find competing business laptops more practical. There are a number of ultraportable business laptops with superb battery life, more useful ports, and comparable weight (such as Asus’ ExpertBook B9450 and HP’s Elite Dragonfly). That said, for users who are attached to the ThinkPad brand and want the lightest of the light, the X1 Nano will deliver.
Unless AMD actually sells them for $479, of course
AMD and Nvidia are pretending they live in a fantasy world, one where you can buy a state-of-the-art graphics card for under $700. Heck, a fantasy world where you can buy a new AMD GPU at all — though AMD has repeatedly promised it would stock additional RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT graphics cards at its website for $579 and $649 respectively, I’ve seen no evidence the company has ever replenished those supplies since those cards first debuted four months ago.
Today, the company’s launching a GPU that might change that: the $479 Radeon RX 6700 XT. AMD tells The Verge it will have “significantly more GPUs available.” If that’s true — if this is the moment the clouds part, the GPU shortage recedes, and you can actually buy a RX 6700 XT for $479 for even a limited time — you absolutely should. It’s a solid performer at 1440p.
But amusingly, in the fantasy world where we’re pretending a $400 GeForce RTX 3060 Ti and $500 RTX 3070 still exist, the RX 6700 XT actually feels outgunned. It’s not the clear-cut Nvidia competitor you might have hoped for.
The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT comes with a simple pitch: a way to max out your 2560 x 1440 monitor with the latest games at maximum settings, all for $100 less than the RX 6800 I reviewed late last year. If that sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the same playbook Nvidia used last fall, where its $400 RTX 3060 Ti undercut the $500 RTX 3070 by the same amount.
So in our fantasy world where those prices held, this would be the lay of the land:
Mid-range desktop gaming GPUs in 2021
Price
Product
Promise
Price
Product
Promise
$399
Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti
Solid 1440p
$479
AMD RX 6700 XT
Maxed 1440p
$499
Nvidia RTX 3070
Maxed 1440p / entry-level 4K
$579
AMD RX 6800
Maxed 1440p / decent 4K
Given those prices, I’d expect a $480 AMD card to soundly thrash a $400 Nvidia card. (That’s what the $580 Radeon RX 6800 did to the $500 RTX 3070, after all.) I’d also expect it to be within spitting distance of the $500 Nvidia card if there were only a $20 bill between the two.
But running AMD’s card through my 15-game gauntlet on my own 1440p monitor, AMD’s new card sometimes lost to Nvidia’s 3060 Ti — sometimes by a lot — and it can even lose to Nvidia’s vanilla $329 RTX 3060 in tests where I had ray tracing turned on.
1440p gaming (with Core i7-7700K, 32GB DDR4)
Game
RTX 3060
RTX 3060 Ti
RX 6700 XT
RTX 3070
Does AMD pull its weight?
Game
RTX 3060
RTX 3060 Ti
RX 6700 XT
RTX 3070
Does AMD pull its weight?
AC: Odyssey
57
66
58
72
No
AC: Valhalla
50
63
75
70
Yes
Arkham Knight
126
147
140
156
No
Borderlands 3 (Badass)
50
65
82
81
Yes
Borderlands 3 (Ultra)
55
69
87
86
Yes
CS: GO
231
236
225
238
No
Control
50
63
65
76
Not quite
Control (RT)
29
37
25
42
Definitely no
Control (RT+DLSS)
51
64
N/A
68
N/A
Cyberpunk 2077
38
49
52
55
Yes
Cyberpunk 2077 (RT)
18
22
N/A
27
No AMD RT support yet
Cyberpunk 2077 (RT+DLSS)
39
45
N/A
52
N/A
COD: Warzone
87
102
114
120
Yes
DX: Mankind Divided
57
74
89
88
Yes
Metro Exodus (Extreme)
27
37
38
44
No
Metro Exodus (Ultra+RT)
35
47
46
64
No
Metro Exodus (RT+DLSS)
46
61
N/A
72
N/A
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
78
99
105
105
Yes
SotR (RT)
47
59
55
72
No
SotR (RT+DLSS)
57
72
N/A
82
N/A
Star Wars Squadrons
125
151
167
165
Yes
Watch Dogs: Legion
46
61
64
70
Not quite
WD: Legion (RT)
27
35
25
42
Definitely no
WD: Legion (RT+DLSS)
50
62
N/A
62
N/A
Valheim
60
81
70
89-91
Definitely no
Frames per second; all games tested at highest graphical preset unless specified.
As you’ll see in the chart above, AMD does notch some wins, and in many cases lives up to its promise of maxed settings at 1440p. Shadow of the Tomb Raider looks glorious on my G-Sync / FreeSync monitor at an average 105 frames per second with all the eye candy turned up, and the difference between 120 frames and 114 frames in Call of Duty: Warzone at max settings (probably) isn’t worth quibbling about.
With a beefier processor, you should be able to get 60+ frames per second in a maxed-out Cyberpunk 2077 experience, too — I’m still testing with my old Core i7-7700K, which is more than good enough for most of the games on this list (SotR shows I’m 100 percent GPU-bound), but a few titles like Microsoft Flight Simulator and Cyberpunk are still notoriously CPU limited and more cores could help. As another example, my colleague Tom Warren saw identical framerates to me in Watch Dogs: Legion and Metro Exodus pairing the 6700 XT with a far newer Intel chip, but slightly higher in Assassin’s Creed Valhalla.
Is that a 3060 Ti or 3070 on the left? Both can beat the RX 6700 XT in some games.
But look at Valheim. Look at Assassin’s Creed Odyssey. Look at Control. How is AMD underperforming or merely tying these lower tier cards? Things aren’t any rosier at 4K resolution, in case you’re wondering: while I still recommend Nvidia’s 3070 for entry-level 4K, the 6700 XT just doesn’t have the same oomph. In games like Control and Metro Exodus, I had to drop the settings to a comparatively dull “low,” where the 3070 managed to play those games at 4K and medium-spec without trouble. And of course, AMD doesn’t yet have a DLSS competitor if you’re a fan of AI-upscaled resolution.
It’s not like AMD is winning in any other particular way, either. While I’m actually fond of the company’s new two-slot design (clearly inspired by a certain late 1960s muscle car) and I don’t hugely mind going from three to two axial fans, the RX 6700 XT is just as chunky and nearly as power-hungry as the RX 6800 (230W vs. 250W) without as much to show for it. AMD still recommends a 650W power supply, a pricey proposition for those of us with tall PC cases, and you’ll need both 6 and 8-pin PCIe connectors, while Nvidia’s comparable cards make do with a single 8-pin.
I also saw the 6700 XT hit 89 degrees Celsius on one occasion. While I don’t have enough evidence to say that’s a problem, I’ve yet to see Nvidia’s 3070 cross 82 degrees C even with my case fans unplugged.
But as I alluded to in my intro, very little of this will matter if you can actually find this card for $479.
All modern AMD and Nvidia cards have plenty of display support, with one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPorts.
In December, I reported that the true street price of a $399 Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti was actually $675, and that the street price of an $499 RTX 3070 was actually $819. Those were the average prices people actually paid on eBay that month.
If you think that sounds unbelievable, hear this: the street price of the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3070 are now approaching $1,200 each. People are paying triple for what should have been Nvidia’s bang-for-the-buck graphics card now, and the launch of a “$329” RTX 3060 didn’t slow that at all.
To me, this indicates two things: First, AMD probably isn’t going to be able to make anywhere near enough RX 6700 XTs to hit anywhere near that $479 price for the vast majority of buyers, even if it produces “significantly” more cards. I wouldn’t expect today to play out any differently than any previous GPU launch since the pandemic began. It’s a well-established pattern now. Second, none of these fantasyland prices will necessarily keep the RX 6700 XT from being a hit if the supply is there. As you can see from the similar street prices for the 3060 Ti and 3070, the market has a way of balancing prices out.
If you miraculously see this card for its list price, buy it, because you won’t get anything better for anywhere near that price in the near future. But it feels inferior to every Nvidia GPU that can compare — and I wouldn’t trade my 3060 Ti for one.
Performance results for Intel’s unreleased eight-core Tiger Lake-H parts are already being posted online. Benchleaks shared Geekbench 5 scores of the upcoming Core i7-11800H Tiger Lake-H CPU with impressive results.
Rumor has it that the Core i7-11800H will be one of Intel’s beefy 45W Tiger Lake-H parts featuring eight cores and 16 threads to compete with the likes of AMD’s Ryzen 7 5800H. Like Intel’s current U-series and H35 products, the eight-core Tiger Lake variants will feature Intel’s latest Willow Cove cores powered by the 10nm SuperFin architecture, allowing for up to 20% higher clock speeds than the previous models.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Geekbench 5)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Geekbench 5)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Geekbench 5)
Strangely we have not just one, but three Geekbench results for the i7-11800H. Presumably, this was done to attain a more realistic Geekbench 5 result, as executing multiple benchmark runs and averaging the results can be more realistic than running a benchmark a single time.
When we average the three results together, the i7-11700H managed a single-threaded score of 1474 points and a multi-threaded score of 8116 points. That makes the i7-11800H around 15% faster than its predecessor, the Core i7-10875H, suggesting a healthy gen-on-gen performance improvement.
However, if we compare the i7-11800H to the best Ryzen 7 5800H Geekbench 5 scores, that puts the 5800H and 11800H within 2% of each other. That lands within the margin of error, so we can safely say that both chips offer similar performance in Geekbench 5.
If these results are true, then Intel is poised to make a major comeback in the notebook segment, finally catching up to AMD’s impressive Zen 3 notebook processors.
AMD is moving its mobile Ryzen 5000 processors into business with Ryzen 5000 Pro, the company announced today. The new series consists of three chips, the Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U, Ryzen 5 Pro 5650U and Ryzen 3 5450U, and AMD claims the processors will show up in 63 laptop designs this year, including laptops from Lenovo and HP.
All three processors are on AMD’s Zen 3 architecture and 7nm process. (In fact, they are almost exactly identical, except for cache, on specs with the consumer-focused Ryzen 7 5800U, Ryzen 5 5600U and Ryzen 3 5400U)
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Cores / Threads
Frequency
Architecture
Node
L2 + L3 Cache
TDP
Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
16-Aug
1.9 GHz base, up to 4.4 GHz
Zen 3
7nm
20 MB
15W
Ryzen 5 Pro 5650U
12-Jun
2.3 GHz base, up to 4.2 GHz
Zen 3
7nm
19 MB
15W
Ryzen 3 Pro 5450U
8-Apr
2.6 GHz. up to 4.0 GHz
Zen 3
7nm
10 MB
15W
In benchmarks released by the company, it compared the top-of-the-line, Cezanne-based AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U to Intel’s 28W Core i7-1185G7 “Tiger Lake” part.
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD admitted to a 3% loss against the Core i7 in single-threaded performance (measured in Cinebench R20) but showed 65% gains in Cinebench R20 multi-thread and Passmark 10 CPU Mark, as well as Geekbench 5’s multi-core (single-core scores weren’t listed). In these tests, Intel’s chip was housed in a Dell Latitude 5420 with 32GB of RAM at 3,200 MHz and a 512GB SSD from SK Hynix, while the Ryzen Pro was in a reference platform with 16GB of LPDDR4 RAM at 4,266 MHz and a 512GB Samsung 970 Pro SSD.
(Image credit: AMD)
In productivity, the two tied in Microsoft Word and the Edge browser in AMD’s tests, but the Cezanne chip came out between 4% and 23% in other productivity benchmarks. Those tests switched the Intel laptop to an MSI Prestige 14 Evo with a 28W TDP, 16GB of RAM at 4,267 MHz, and a Kingston SSD of unspecified size. The AMD machine remained the reference design.
(Image credit: AMD)
Just to show off, AMD also picked some benchmarks comparing the Ryzen 5 Pro 5650U and the Core i7-1185G7, where its chip outperformed Intel in Passmark 10 CPU Mark (+25%), Geekbench 5 multi-core (+26%), PCMark 10 Apps (+4%) and PCMark 10 Benchmark (+20%). This round of testing also used the MSI Prestige 14 Evo and the reference design.
(Image credit: AMD)
Compared to the Latitude with Intel Core i7-1185G7, AMD claims that the Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U is up to 10% faster while running a 49-participant Zoom call and running the PCMark 10 applications benchmark.
(Image credit: AMD)
For battery life, AMD compared to previous generation Ryzen Pro chips, suggesting the 7nm process helps the new Ryzen 7 reach 17.5 hours on Mobile Mark 2018’s general computing test.
(Image credit: AMD)
The company is touting new security features for this year. AMD Shadow Stack is at the hardware level to prevent malware. It’s part of the Secured Core PC program, which Microsoft announced with Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm in late 2019, and also meets the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS).
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
To mark the launch, AMD is also showcasing six laptops coming from partners HP and Lenovo. The HP Probook Aero 635 G2 and HP Probook x360 435 G8 will be exclusive for 2021, and the Lenovo ThinkBook 16) is listed as an “AMD exclusive creator platform.” The company also listed the HP EliteBook 845 G8, ThinkPad T14S and ThinkBook 14S as highlighted notebooks.
(Pocket-lint) – The MacBook Air receives an annual upgrade, with the 2020 model doubling the base storage and introducing a newer keyboard mechanism compared to the 2019 model. But is anything else different? Here’s a quick-glance comparison between 2020 and 2019 MacBook Air models.
If you’re otherwise interested in the newer M1 MacBook then check out our M1-powered MacBook Pro vs MacBook Air feature instead. We also have a breakdown of all Mac options in our Which MacBook is best for you? feature.
squirrel_widget_161334
Design & Display
Both models: 13.3-inch ‘Retina display’ (2560 x 1600 resolution)
2020 model: 40g heavier than 2019 version, at 1.29kgs
Both models: Gold, Silver, Space Grey finish options
Both models: 15.6mm thickness, same design
Both models: 1x 3.5mm headphone jack
Both models: 2x Thunderbolt 3 ports
At a glance both 2020 and 2019 MacBook Air models look identical. The same scale, same colour options, same screen – it’s all the same. Indeed, even the 2021 models are identical in appearance.
There’s some subtle differences though. The 2020 model is 40g heavier, plus can support an external monitor to 6K (6016 x 3384) rather than the 5K support from the 2019 model.
In terms of ports, the 2020 Air sticks to its guns: that means the usual two Thunderbolt 3 ports, no additions this time around. The headphone jack is still in place, too.
That also means no improvement to the FaceTime camera: it’s still only 720p capable. Oh how we wish Apple would update this dated feature for a Full HD one!
Keyboard & Trackpad
2020 model: Magic Keyboard with redesigned scissor mechanism
This is where the biggest change can be seen. The 2020 Air utilises a Magic Keyboard, the same kind you’ll find in the 16-inch MacBook from the tail-end of 2019. That’s also now the standard in the 2021 M1 MacBooks, too, if you’re looking for a newer model.
Apple MacBook Pro 13-inch (M1 processor) review: The start of something new
It’s an important change, as the redesigned scissor mechanism here we found far superior than the butterfly mechanism of the earlier Air keyboards, which should mean less phantom typing. That said, we thought the 2019 Air’s keyboard was much improved over the 2018 model.
Elsewhere both 2019 and 2020 models have the same large trackpad design with Force Touch dual-layer control, plus Touch ID fingerprint login. There’s still no Face ID facial recognition login however – it seems Apple is holding its laptops away from such a sign-in system for now.
The 2020 Air also ramps up the base specification a little, by doubling the storage from 128GB to 256GB. It’s also possible to upgrade to 2TB, rather than 1.5TB, if you want to spend the extra cash.
On the processor front, these models are pre-M1, so that’s not an option. But the standard Intel Core i5 processor of the 2019 Air became an Intel Core i3 – which also brought with it a £100/$100/€100 saving, meaning the 2020 MacBook Air wasn’t quite as expensive, despite having more storage on board.
Battery life is one area that we’re unsure how these models will compare: the 2020 Air should last longer thanks to newer and more efficient processor hardware, unless, of course, you pick the more powerful processor upgrade. Some suggest that the newer model will deliver a slight downturn in battery performance though. But, really, if you want longevity then go for a 2021 M1 model – as it’ll last yonks longer.
squirrel_widget_193481
Conclusion
2020 MacBook Air: From £999/$999/€999
2019 MacBook Air: From £1,099/$1,099/€1,099
The 2020 Air didn’t bring with it an ultimate redesign, nor more ports to bolster the experience. What it savvily did, however, was bring all the goodness of before, plus more storage, and a better keyboard, but for less cash. That was a sensible move, as a stepping-stone year before the M1 MacBook models started to roll out.
Intel’s upcoming Rocket Lake CPUs are almost upon us, and yet again we have more leaked benchmarks pertaining to the Core i9-11900K, Core i7-11700K, and Core i5-11400. Tweeted by legendary benchmark database detective APISAK, we have CPU-Z benchmark results for these three chips, with the Core i9 and Core i7 pumping out some amazing single-threaded scores.
While these results are highly favorable to Intel, keep in mind that CPU-Z is just like most benchmarks and can be favor one CPU architecture over another, so be careful in trusting these results. We also aren’t sure if these tests were run at standard stock settings. In either case, the results paint a promising picture for Rocket Lake’s single-threaded performance.
CPU-Z Benchmark Results
CPUs:
CPU-Z Single Threaded Test
CPU-Z Multi-Threaded Test
Core i9-11900K
716
6539
Core i7-11700K
719
N/A
Core i5-11400
544
4012
Ryzen 9 5950X
658
12366
Ryzen 9 5900X
633
8841
Ryzen 7 5800X
650
6593
Ryzen 5 5600X
643
4814
Intel’s Core i9 and Core i7 Rocket Lake chips dominate in the single-threaded CPU-Z test — both chips sit comfortably above the 700 mark. Compared to AMD’s best offering, the 5950X, the Rocket Lake chips are roughly 7% faster.
Of course, Rocket Lake’s IPC gains won’t make up for reduced core counts, so it’s no surprise that the Ryzen 9 5950X and 5900X win in the multi-threading department.
But, if we limit our comparisons to just the eight-core parts, the Ryzen 5 5800X makes up a lot of ground against the 11900K, and is just 0.8% quicker. This is within the margin of error, so we can safely say both chips are equal in this test. Unfortunately, the 11700K has no multi-threaded score, so that chip is out of the picture for now.
We don’t know why the 5800X makes up all its performance losses from the single-threaded test in the multi-threaded test, but it could be due to reduced turbo frequencies on the Core i9 part, as well as architectural differences between the two chips.
Intel’s upcoming mid-range SKU, the Core i5-11400, is the weakest of the bunch being 18% slower than the 5600X (in the single and multi-threaded tests). However, like the previous 400- series Core i5s, we can expect the 11400 to have reduced clock speeds to help drive costs down.
We’ll have to wait for a Core i5-11600K result to have a fair comparison against AMD’s Ryzen 5 5600X.
If the CPU-Z benchmarks are to be trusted, Intel’s Core i9-11900K and i7-11700K could make our list of best CPUs and climb the ranks in our CPU Benchmark hierarchy for single-threaded workloads.
Spectre continues to go bump in the night. The vulnerability was revealed in 2018, but even though it’s largely faded from public consciousness, it’s still a threat. Case in point: Google has published a proof-of-concept website called Leaky.Page that shows how attackers can use JavaScript to exploit Spectre via popular web browsers.
Let’s turn back the clock. Spectre was disclosed with another vulnerability, Meltdown, that vendors were quick to address despite their fixes causing slight performance drops. Responding to Spectre has proven more difficult because it requires Intel, AMD, Arm, and Nvidia to change their processor architectures.
In the meantime, it’s up to other companies to limit their customers’ exposure to the vulnerability, which is where this proof-of-concept comes in. Google said in a blog post that it wanted to “give web application owners a better understanding of the impact Spectre vulnerabilities can have on the security of their users’ data.”
The result is Leaky.Page, which offers a summary of Google’s intent before giving people the chance to see how JavaScript-based Spectre exploits could affect their systems. Google published a video of a successful test that you can watch right here:
Leaky.Page was originally configured for Chrome 88 running on an unidentified version of Linux and an Intel Core i7-6500U. Google said that its proof-of-concept could “function across a variety of operating systems, processor architectures, and hardware generations,” however, “without any major changes” to the code.
The company only named one additional processor susceptible to this exploit: the M1 chip Apple introduced in November 2020. That doesn’t come as a surprise—we already knew that Arm’s designs were affected by Spectre—but it’s a worthwhile reminder that Apple silicon can be affected by three-year-old vulnerabilities.
Google said its tests on Chrome 88, Linux, and an Intel Skylake processor leaked data at speeds up to 1kB/s. Results will vary based on the system tested, however, which is why Leaky.Page could prove useful. A list of recommendations to web developers looking to protect their users can be found in Google’s blog post.
Even they aren’t enough. Google noted that “while all of the mechanisms described in this article are important and powerful security primitives, they don’t guarantee complete protection against Spectre; they require a considered deployment approach which takes behaviors specific to the given application into account.”
This year, multiple companies primarily known for gaming laptops have been branching out into the portable business and productivity sector. It’s a crowded field already, but Razer made quite a splash with its excellent Razer Book 13, which has an elegant chassis, a 16:10 screen, and just a touch of its company’s signature RGB lighting.
In this review I’m looking at the Summit Series, which is MSI’s attempt to enter the same space. The series includes the Summit E line — which includes discrete GPU options and is priced to compete with top dogs like Dell’s XPS 15 — and the Summit B line, which starts at $999 and sits squarely in the midrange market.
I’m discussing the Summit B15 here — I looked at the Summit E15 last fall. The base B15 includes a Core i5-1135G7, 8GB of RAM, and a 512GB SSD. I tested the more expensive configuration, which costs $1,249 and has a Core i7-1165G7 (one of Intel’s top 11th Gen processors), 16GB of RAM, and a 1TB SSD. The system puts solid specs in a nice chassis, but there are a few misses that make it a bit expensive for what it offers.
The most appealing facets of the Summit-Series laptops are their look and build. They have a smooth black finish, an aluminum build, a classy backlit keyboard, and a lustrous new MSI logo on the lid and bottom bezel (no dragon to be found, a first for MSI). MSI claims the B15 has “military-grade durability,” and while that’s a difficult claim to test, there’s very little flex in the B15’s lid and keyboard. And at 3.53 pounds and 0.67 inches thick, it’s light for its size.
All in all, though, the B15 has a bit of a utilitarian look, especially compared to the E15. The latter has some small flourishes that add up to a classier vibe — there are gold accents around the touchpad and edges of the hinge, for example, where the B15 is straight black. One other thing about the B15’s chassis — it’s one of the worst fingerprint magnets I’ve ever seen. Touch the lid one time, and a visible smudge will remain. I used the sides of my fists to reposition the laptop while taking photos and still had to wipe it down between shots.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s a nice-looking and nice-feeling chassis. But there’s nothing exciting about it, and you’ll be wiping it down a lot if you want to maintain a clean look.
Two USB-A and a microSD on the right.
The useful port selection is a highlight, given the thin chassis. It includes a USB-C (supporting Thunderbolt 4, power delivery, DP 1.4a, and USB 4.0), two USB-A 3.2 Gen 2, one USB 3.2 Gen 1, one combination audio jack, one microSD reader, and one HDMI jack, in addition to the barrel-plug power port. You also get an RJ45 Ethernet dongle in the box, which is handy. I also appreciate having USB-A ports on both sides.
I also like the keyboard backlighting, which looks quite classy and wouldn’t be out of place in an office setting. The keys have a nice texture and 1.5mm of travel. Three nitpicks to note: First, the Fn key is half-sized, and I found it a pain to hit. Second, there was occasionally some internal rattle inside the deck, which was annoying. Third, the keys are more mushy than they are clicky, and they’re a bit shallower than the best keyboard keys around. Subjectively, I made more errors on this keyboard than I normally do.
Audio jack, HDMI, USB-C, USB-A, and power port on the left.
The display, similarly, is functional with caveats. It covers 98 percent of the sRGB gamut and 76 percent of AdobeRGB, and it maxes out at 258 nits. That’s an acceptable range of color coverage and is functional enough for office use, but it’s too dim to use easily in bright settings. I would expect more from a $1,249 laptop. Additionally, it uses a 16:9 aspect ratio, which is falling out of fashion among premium business laptops for a reason — it’s cramped for multitasking purposes.
The one component I really don’t like is the touchpad. It’s a bit small for a 15-inch laptop, and I sometimes hit the fingerprint sensor (built into the top-left corner) and the top plastic as I was scrolling. It also isn’t the smoothest I’ve ever used, and my fingers would skid across it a fair amount. Both the material and the click feel a bit plasticky compared to what you might find in a nicer model.
The Summit’s performance is good. I didn’t encounter any problems while running it through my usual office work. The integrated Iris Xe graphics aren’t suitable for serious gaming but can run lighter fare if that’s your thing. I could occasionally feel the system chugging under the keyboard while doing more intense tasks, but it never got too loud or too hot. You can swap to the “Silent” cooling profile in MSI’s control panel if fan noise is bothering you.
With that said, two disappointments came out of my testing period. First, the audio from the B15’s two speakers isn’t terrible and works just fine for video calls, but it delivers tinny percussion and practically no bass. I also heard occasional distortion at maximum volume, though I could eliminate it by bumping the sound down a notch. My test unit’s microphone also wasn’t working on Zoom calls, though it worked in other applications — I’ve asked MSI about this and will update this article if they figure it out.
Second disappointment: the battery life. Running the B15 as my daily driver at 200 nits of brightness, I only averaged five hours and 13 minutes. This isn’t entirely unexpected, as it only has a three-cell 52Wh battery — similar to what some 13-inch laptops come with at this point. On this 15-inch laptop, it’s not enough to power you through a full day if your workload is similar to mine (around a dozen Chrome tabs, Slack, occasional Zoom call, that sort of thing). One thing to note is that the B15 comes loaded with Norton, which I’ve seen be a serious battery drain in the past. I ran a battery trial before uninstalling that software and only got four and a half hours. After I nuked the bloatware, the B15 got closer to six.
All told, the Summit Series is a fine first step for MSI. In a market where business-focused laptops commonly cost multiple thousands of dollars, there’s absolutely an audience for something like the B15, which is light, attractive, and functional for just over the $1,000 mark. It looks and feels like a laptop you’d bring to a business meeting, and it has a top Intel processor with cooling that can handle it. Professionals on a budget could certainly do worse.
“Determined to succeed” is the Summit Series motto.
But given the unremarkable audio, battery life, and the other areas of the chassis, I still think that people who are willing to spend a bit more will benefit from doing so, especially folks who can live with less RAM and storage. A better screen, better speakers, and better battery life can make a big difference in the daily experience, and while the B15’s nice chassis, plentiful storage, and business-specific features are worth a premium for some folks, they won’t be everyone’s top priority.
Although Intel has not yet officially launched its 11th-Gen Core processors for desktops codenamed Rocket Lake, these CPUs were available from a single retailer for a brief period of time, so enthusiasts have already begun experimenting. Recently, one experimenter decided to remove the Core i7-10700K’s lid (delid) to reveal the die underneath.
This week MoeBen, an enthusiast from Overclock.net forums, delidded Intel’s Core i7-11700K processor. Even though he used special tools for delidding, the CPU died as a result of his manipulations.
The main thing that strikes the eye about Intel’s Rocket Lake is its rather massive die size. A quick comparison of Rocket Lake’s silicon to delidded Intel’s previous-generation processors reveals that the die of Intel’s eight-core Core i7-11700K is both ‘taller’ and ‘wider’ than the die of Intel’s 10-core Core i9-10900K. Also, the new CPU uses a slightly different packaging with resistors placed differently.
(Image credit: MoeBen @ Overclock.net)
Based on rough napkin math based on the size of Intel’s LGA115x/1200 packaging (38 mm × 38 mm), an estimate for the Rocket Lake die size puts it around 11.78 mm × 24.58 mm, or 289.5 mm2. Such a large die area puts Rocket Lake into the league of the company’s LCC high-end desktop and server processors. For example, Intel’s 10-core Skylake-SP with a massive cache is around 322 mm2.
Intel’s Rocket Lake processors pack eight cores based on the Cypress Cove microarchitecture (which is a derivative of the company’s Willow Cove microarchitecture), an integrated GPU featuring the Xe architecture, a new media encoding/decoding engine, a revamped display pipeline, and a new memory controller.
Essentially, Rocket Lake uses CPU and GPU IP designed for Intel’s 10 nm SuperFin process technology, yet since it is made using one of Intel’s 14 nm nodes, it is natural that the said IP consumes more silicon area. To that end, it is not surprising that the new CPU is substantially bigger than its predecessor despite the fact that it has fewer cores. Obviously, since these cores are larger (and faster), they take up more die space.
Intel is projected to officially launch its Rocket Lake processors on March 30, 2021.
TechPowerUp is one of the most highly cited graphics card review sources on the web, and we strive to keep our testing methods, game selection, and, most importantly, test bench up to date. Today, I am pleased to announce our newest March 2021 VGA test system, which has one of many firsts for TechPowerUp. This is our first graphics card test bed powered by an AMD CPU. We are using the Ryzen 7 5800X 8-core processor based on the “Zen 3” architecture. The new test setup fully supports the PCI-Express 4.0 x16 bus interface to maximize performance of the latest generation of graphics cards by both NVIDIA and AMD. The platform also enables the Resizable BAR feature by PCI-SIG, allowing the processor to see the whole video memory as a single addressable block, which could potentially improve performance.
A new test system heralds completely re-testing every single graphics card used in our performance graphs. It allows us to kick out some of the older graphics cards and game tests to make room for newer cards and games. It also allows us to refresh our OS, testing tools, update games to the latest version, and explore new game settings, such as real-time raytracing, and newer APIs.
A VGA rebench is a monumental task for TechPowerUp. This time, I’m testing 26 graphics cards in 22 games at 3 resolutions, or 66 game tests per card, which works out to 1,716 benchmark runs in total. In addition, we have doubled our raytracing testing from two to four titles. We also made some changes to our power consumption testing, which is now more detailed and more in-depth than ever.
In this article, I’ll share some thoughts on what was changed and why, while giving you a first look at the performance numbers obtained on the new test system.
Hardware
Below are the hardware specifications of the new March 2021 VGA test system.
Windows 10 Professional 64-bit Version 20H2 (October 2020 Update)
Drivers:
AMD: 21.2.3 Beta NVIDIA: 461.72 WHQL
The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X has emerged as the fastest processor we can recommend to gamers for play at any resolution. We could have gone with the 12-core Ryzen 9 5900X or even maxed out this platform with the 16-core 5950X, but neither would be faster at gaming, and both would be significantly more expensive. AMD certainly wants to sell you the more expensive (overpriced?) CPU, but the Ryzen 7 5800X is actually the fastest option because of its single CCD architecture. Our goal with GPU test systems over the past decade has consistently been to use the fastest mainstream-desktop processor. Over the years, this meant a $300-something Core i7 K-series LGA115x chip making room for the $500 i9-9900K. The 5900X doesn’t sell for anywhere close to this mark, and we’d rather not use an overpriced processor just because we can. You’ll also notice that we skipped upgrading to the 10-core “Comet Lake” Core i9-10900K processor from the older i9-9900K because we saw no significant increases and negligible gaming performance gains, especially considering the large overclock on the i9-9900K. The additional two cores do squat for nearly all gaming situations, which is the second reason besides pricing that had us decide against the Ryzen 9 5900X.
We continue using our trusted Thermaltake TOUGHRAM 16 GB dual-channel memory kit that served us well for many years. 32 GB isn’t anywhere close to needed for gaming, so I didn’t want to hint at that, especially to less experienced readers checking out the test system. We’re running at the most desirable memory configuration for Zen 3 to reduce latencies inside the processor: Infinity Fabric at 2000 MHz, memory clocked at DDR4-4000, in 1:1 sync with the Infinity Fabric clock. Timings are at a standard CL19 configuration that’s easily found on affordable memory modules—spending extra for super-tight timings usually is overkill and not worth it for the added performance.
The MSI B550-A PRO was an easy choice for a motherboard. We wanted a cost-effective motherboard for the Ryzen 9 5800X and don’t care at all about RGB or other bling. The board can handle the CPU and memory settings we wanted for this test bed, the VRM barely gets warm. It also doesn’t come with any PCIe gymnastics—a simple PCI-Express 4.0 x16 slot wired to the CPU without any lane switches along the way. The slot is metal-reinforced and looks like it can take quite some abuse over time. Even though I admittedly swap cards hundreds of times each year, probably even 1000+ times, it has never been any issue—insertion force just gets a bit softer, which I actually find nice.
Software and Games
Windows 10 was updated to 20H2
The AMD graphics driver used for all testing is now 21.2.3 Beta
All NVIDIA cards use 461.72 WHQL
All existing games have been updated to their latest available version
The following titles were removed:
Anno 1800: old, not that popular, CPU limited
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey: old, DX11, replaced by Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Hitman 2: old, replaced by Hitman 3
Project Cars 3: not very popular, DX11
Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order: horrible EA Denuvo makes hardware changes a major pain, DX11 only, Unreal Engine 4, of which we have several other titles
Strange Brigade: old, not popular at all
The following titles were added:
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
Cyberpunk 2077
Hitman 3
Star Wars Squadrons
Watch Dogs: Legion
I considered Horizon Zero Dawn, but rejected it because it uses the same game engine as Death Stranding. World of Warcraft or Call of Duty won’t be tested because of their always-online nature, which enforces game patches that mess with performance—at any time. Godfall is a bad game, Epic exclusive, and commercial flop.
The full list of games now consists of Assassin’s Creed Valhalla, Battlefield V, Borderlands 3, Civilization VI, Control, Cyberpunk 2077, Death Stranding, Detroit Become Human, Devil May Cry 5, Divinity Original Sin 2, DOOM Eternal, F1 2020, Far Cry 5, Gears 5, Hitman 3, Metro Exodus, Red Dead Redemption 2, Sekiro, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Star Wars Squadrons, The Witcher 3, and Watch Dogs: Legion.
Raytracing
We previously tested raytracing using Metro Exodus and Control. For this round of retesting, I added Cyberpunk 2077 and Watch Dogs Legion. While Cyberpunk 2077 does not support raytracing on AMD, I still felt it’s one of the most important titles to test raytracing with.
While Godfall and DIRT 5 support raytracing, too, neither has had sufficient commercial success to warrant inclusion in the test suite.
Power Consumption Testing
The power consumption testing changes have been live for a couple of reviews already, but I still wanted to detail them a bit more in this article.
After our first Big Navi reviews I realized that something was odd about the power consumption testing method I’ve been using for years without issue. It seemed the Radeon RX 6800 XT was just SO much more energy efficient than NVIDIA’s RTX 3080. It definitely is more efficient because of the 7 nm process and AMD’s monumental improvements in the architecture, but the lead just didn’t look right. After further investigation, I realized that the RX 6800 XT was getting CPU bottlenecked in Metro: Last Light at even the higher resolutions, whereas the NVIDIA card ran without a bottleneck. This of course meant NVIDIA’s card consumed more power in this test because it could run faster.
The problem here is that I used the power consumption numbers from Metro for the “Performance per Watt” results under the assumption that the test loaded the card to the max. The underlying reason for the discrepancy is AMD’s higher DirectX 11 overhead, which only manifested itself enough to make a difference once AMD actually had cards able to compete in the high-end segment.
While our previous physical measurement setup was better than what most other reviewers use, I always wanted something with a higher sampling rate, better data recording, and a more flexible analysis pipeline. Previously, we recorded at 12 samples per second, but could only store minimum, maximum, and average. Starting and stopping the measurement process was a manual operation, too.
The new data acquisition system also uses professional lab equipment and collects data at 40 samples per second, which is four times faster than even NVIDIA’s PCAT. Every single data point is recorded digitally and stashed away for analysis. Just like before, all our graphics card power measurement is “card only”, not the “whole system” or “GPU chip only” (the number displayed in the AMD Radeon Settings control panel).
Having all data recorded means we can finally chart power consumption over time, which makes for a nice overview. Below is an example data set for the RTX 3080.
The “Performance per Watt” chart has been simplified to “Energy Efficiency” and is now based on the actual power and FPS achieved during our “Gaming” power consumption testing run (Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p, see below).
The individual power tests have also been refined:
“Idle” testing is now measuring at 1440p, whereas it used 1080p previously. This is to follow the increasing adoption rates of high-res monitors.
“Multi-monitor” is now 2560×1440 over DP + 1920×1080 over HDMI—to test how well power management works with mixed resolutions over mixed outputs.
“Video Playback” records power usage of a 4K30 FPS video that’s encoded with H.264 AVC at 64 Mbps bitrate—similar enough to most streaming services. I considered using something like madVR to further improve video quality, but rejected it because I felt it to be too niche.
“Gaming” power consumption is now using Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p with Ultra settings—this definitely won’t be CPU bottlenecked. Raytracing is off, and we made sure to heat up the card properly before taking data. This is very important for all GPU benchmarking—in the first seconds, you will get unrealistic boost rates, and the lower temperature has the silicon operating at higher efficiency, which screws with the power consumption numbers.
“Maximum” uses Furmark at 1080p, which pushes all cards into its power limiter—another important data point.
Somewhat as a bonus, and I really wasn’t sure if it’s as useful, I added another run of Cyberpunk at 1080p, capped to 60 FPS, to simulate a “V-Sync” usage scenario. Running at V-Sync not only removes tearing, but also reduces the power consumption of the graphics card, which is perfect for slower single-player titles where you don’t need the highest FPS and would rather conserve some energy and have less heat dumped into your room. Just to clarify, we’re technically running a 60 FPS soft cap so that weaker cards that can’t hit 60 FPS (GTX 1650S and GTX 1660) won’t run 60/30/20 FPS V-Sync, but go as high as able.
Last but not least, a “Spikes” measurement was added, which reports the highest 20 ms spike recorded in this whole test sequence. This spike usually appears at the start of Furmark, before the card’s power limiting circuitry can react to the new conditions. On RX 6900 XT, I measured well above 600 W, which can trigger the protections of certain power supplies, resulting in the machine suddenly turning off. This happened to me several times with a different PSU than the Seasonic, so it’s not a theoretical test.
Radeon VII Fail
Since we’re running with Resizable BAR enabled, we also have to boot with UEFI instead of CSM. When it was time to retest the Radeon VII, I got no POST, and it seemed the card was dead. Since there’s plenty of drama around Radeon VII cards suddenly dying, I already started looking for a replacement, but wanted to give it another chance in another machine, which had it working perfectly fine. WTF?
After some googling, I found our article detailing the lack of UEFI support on the Radeon VII. So that was the problem, the card simply didn’t have the BIOS update AMD released after our article. Well, FML, the page with the BIOS update no longer exists on AMD’s website.
Really? Someone on their web team made the decision to just delete the pages that contain an important fix to get the product working, a product that’s not even two years old? (launched Feb 7 2019, page was removed no later than Nov 8 2020).
Luckily, I found the updated BIOS in our VGA BIOS collection, and the card is working perfectly now.
Performance results are on the next page. If you have more questions, please do let us know in the comments section of this article.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
