AMD crushed expectations with its first quarter 2021 financial results today with a record quarterly revenue of $3.45B, an increase of 93% year over year (YoY). AMD grew in every segment of its businesses despite constant product shortages for its consumer CPUs and GPUs at retail, a byproduct of record demand and pandemic-spurred supply chain disruptions.
It’s no secret that AMD has been plagued by shortages of consumer CPUs and GPUs, but the company is obviously selling every piece of silicon it can punch out. AMD raked in $2.1 billion for the computing and graphics segment (Consumer CPUs and GPUs), a 46% improvement over the prior year, driven by Ryzen and Radeon sales.
AMD’s Ryzen processors set records for revenue and average selling prices (ASPs), and AMD says it has increased its desktop PC market share again, an encouraging sign for the company after Intel stole back some desktop PC market share last quarter. However, Intel reported last week that it suffered a sharp decline in ASPs for both its notebook and desktop PC chips due to a shift in its sales mix to lower-end processors. That shift is likely due to AMD’s continued performance lead with its Ryzen 5000 processors and strong sales of its higher-end models. AMD CEO Lisa Su remarked that AMD remains firmly focused on its high-end products.
AMD is also doing well in the notebook segment, with Su remarking, “We delivered our sixth straight quarter of record mobile processor revenue based on sustained demand for Ryzen 4000 series processors and the launch of our new Ryzen 5000 series processors.” Notably, Intel also sold a record number of notebook PC chips last quarter, but it suffered a sharp 43% decline in average selling prices.
Su also said that the company had doubled sales of its Radeon 6000 GPUs over the prior quarter and that GPU supply will improve in the next quarter.
Image 1 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 3 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 4 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 5 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 6 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 7 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 8 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 9 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 10 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 11 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 12 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 13 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 14 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 15 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 16 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 17 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 18 of 18
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD’s Enterprise, Embedded, and Semi-Custom (EESC) group, which covers data center chips and game consoles, was up an incredible 286% over last year as it raked in $1.35 billion, largely driven by strong EPYC processor sales that more than doubled (consoles declined slightly during the quarter).
Notably, during its last earnings report, Intel claimed that its data center processor business suffered from the second quarter in a row of cloud “digestion,” meaning customers were still working through their existing inventory of chips, leading to a massive drop in its own revenue for this important high-margin segment. On the surface, it appears that some of that drubbing took place at the hands of AMD’s EPYC Rome and Milan chips. AMD’s data center revenue accounted for a ‘high-teens’ percentage of the company’s revenue.
AMD reported gross margins of 46%, which is flat for the year. The company has also raised its guidance for the year by $1.3 billion dollars, indicating that it expects the impressive performance will continue throughout the end of the year. That’s an increase from the previously-projected 37% annual growth to a projection for 50% annual growth. Su commented that this increased projection is due to increased demand in both the data center and consumer markets.
Overall, AMD posted an almost flawless quarter, especially in light of the current state of the global market. AMD also guides for an impressive $3.6 billion next quarter, an impressive 86% YoY gain during what is historically a slower quarter.
Home/Component/APU/AMD 4700S appears to be the Xbox Series X|S CPU but for PC
João Silva 2 hours ago APU, Featured Tech News
An unknown AMD processor has appeared online, known as the ‘4700S’. The specifications of this processor don’t line up with any of AMD’s announced CPUs or APUs, but based on some of the details, this could be a reused Xbox Series X|S APU with the graphics cores disabled.
As per the retailer (via @9550pro), the AMD 4700S APU is being sold inside a mini-ITX system. Like the Xbox Series X|S APU, this one is based on the 7nm process node and features 8x Zen 2 cores and 16x threads. The naming lacks the “Ryzen” of other AMD APUs and is apparently based on the ‘Cardinal’ platform.
The boost clock is set at 4.0GHz, which is slightly above the Xbox Series X|S consoles. This might be due to the iGPU being disabled, allowing for more power to be delivered to the CPU, therefore allowing higher clock speeds.
Another similarity with the Xbox Series consoles is the 16GB of GDDR6 memory and the lack of DIMM slots. The reseller even added marketing material featuring the Xbox Series X|S APU, implying that this APU is also used on the consoles. Although we can’t confirm it, it’s possible that these APUs have not passed the tests to be equipped on Xbox Series consoles, so AMD resells them with the iGPU disabled.
The reseller also included some benchmark results, showing the AMD 4700S APU is slower than both the Core i7-9700 processor and the Ryzen 7 4750G Pro, but faster than the Core i7-9750H laptop processor.
KitGuru says: If AMD were to sell the Xbox Series console processor as its own product for the DIY PC market, would you buy one?
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Razer’s Orochi V2 is a compact wireless mouse with up to 900 hours of battery life
Razer is back with another gaming mouse this week. This time around, the Razer Orochi …
Tuesday’s Newegg shuffles always seem to have the most options, and today’s shuffle brings with it a sale on one of AMD’s best CPUs plus a wide selection of Nvidia’s best graphics cards. Only the former is up for grabs solo, but you’re still able to sign up for a chance to buy the Ryzen 9 5900X, RTX 3060, RTX 3070, RTX 3080 or RTX 3090 today. Plus, the Radeon RX 6800 XT is on offer today too, if you want to go for a pure AMD build.
While previous shuffles have had solo purchase options, consoles or bundles with monitors, today’s shuffle brings us back to motherboard, RAM and power supply pack-ins. They’re not overpriced, but you’re not saving anything on these components, either. Newegg is just tacking them on to hard-to-find graphics cards so that you have to buy one to get the GPU you’re probably actually here for.
That said, there is an option to buy a Ryzen 9 5900X on its own for $549 in today’s shuffle, which is probably the most enticing offer today. There’s also an RTX 3080 and 1440p @ 165Hz monitor bundle that’s up for grabs and is probably less likely to give you a redundant part than a motherboard bundle — who doesn’t want a second (or third) monitor?
Of course, you can also splurge on other graphics cards across Nvidia’s RTX 30-series lineup, and there’s even some pretty fancy third-party custom options with water cooling and RGB lighting available. Just be prepared to get a motherboard or other component with your GPU. The Radeon RX 6800 XT bundles also have some pretty swank looking gear from ASRock, plus it’s pretty high up in our GPU benchmarks hierarchy. Although, you’ll be trading away DLSS and some ray tracing capability if you go AMD.
While it’s true that the prices in Newegg Shuffles are higher than the MSRPs for these items, our eBay GPU pricing index shows that they’re still generally far lower than what you’re likely to get from scalpers. In most cases, even with the bundled components you’ll end up with a lower price than on eBay for just the GPU.
For those unfamiliar with the process, Newegg Shuffle uses a lottery format. Just select the component(s) you’d like to potentially buy. Then Newegg will hold a drawing later today, after which the ‘winners’ will be notified by email with the chance to purchase an item (only one) within a several-hour period. Based on our experience, you won’t get selected most of the time. But hey, it’s free to try.
Today’s complete options and prices consist of the following:
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X for $549
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X with Antec 550W Power Supply for $594
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X with Cooler Master Water Cooler for $679
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3060 Elite with Gigabyte B550 Aorus Elite Motherboard for $674
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3060 Elite with Gigabyte B550M Aorus Pro Micro ATX Motherboard for $644
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3060 Elite with Gigabyte B550 Gaming Motherboard for $719
MSI GeForce RTX 3070 Ventus OC with OLOy 2 x 8GB RAM for $844
MSI GeForce RTX 3070 Ventus OC with OLOy WarHawk RGB 2 x 8GB RAM for $839
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3070 with Gigabyte B550 Aorus Pro Motherboard for $994
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3070 with Gigabyte 750W Power Supply for $899
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3070 with Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite Motherboard for $994
Asus TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3080 with ASUS TUF Gaming 27 inch 1440p @ 165Hz Monitor for $1,409
Asus TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3080 with Asus Strix B550-F Gaming Motherboard for $1,269
Gigabyte GeForce RTX 3080 Vision OC with Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master Motherboard for $1,454
Gigabyte GeForce RTX 3080 Vision OC with Gigabyte Z490 Aorus Master Motherboard for $1,464
Gigabyte GeForce RTX 3080 Vision OC with Gigabyte 850W Power Supply for $1,229
ASRock Radeon RX 6800 XT with ASRock B550M Steel Legend Micro ATX Motherboard for $1,439
ASRock Radeon RX 6800 XT with ASRock Z490 Aqua Extended ATX Motherboard for $1,789
Gigabyte Geforce RTX 3090 Vision OC with Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master Motherboard for $2,504
Gigabyte Geforce RTX 3090 Vision OC with Gigabyte 850W Power Supply for $2,279
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3090 Xtreme Waterforce with Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master Motherboard for $2,704
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3090 Xtreme Waterforce with Gigabyte 850W Power Supply for $2,479
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3090 Xtreme Waterforce plus AIO Cooling System with Gigabyte 850W Power Supply for $2,479
Gigabyte Aorus GeForce RTX 3090 Xtreme Waterforce plus AIO Cooling System with Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master Motherboard for $2,704
Regarding those pumped up prices, it’s worth noting that some of these components are also third-party custom options that generally include some extra features. It’s also unclear how much of the pricing increase comes direct from Newegg as opposed to from the AIB partners, though we do know that multiple GPU vendors announced higher prices due to increased tariffs several months ago.
With component shortages plaguing the PC industry, not to mention the smartphone and automotive industries, the latest word is that prices aren’t likely to return to ‘normal’ throughout 2021. If you can keep chugging along with whatever your PC currently has, that’s the best option, as otherwise prices are painful for all of the Nvidia Ampere and AMD RDNA2 GPUs.
Today’s Newegg shuffle starts at 1 pm EST/10 am PST. The Newegg Shuffle normally lasts for 2 hours, so if you’re interested in any of these components, act fast!
For other ways to get hard-to-find graphics cards, check out our RTX 3080 stock tracker and our feature on where to buy RTX 30-series cards. And for more Newegg savings, visit out page of Newegg promo codes.
The Patriot Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20 is only worthy of consideration if you’re willing to invest your time to optimize its timings and if you can find the memory on sale with a big discount.
For
+ Runs at C16 with fine-tuning
+ Balanced design with RGB lighting
+ RGB compatibility with most motherboards
Against
– Very loose timings
– Overpriced
– Low overclocking headroom
Patriot, who isn’t a stranger to our list of Best RAM, has many interesting product lines in its broad repertoire. However, the memory specialist recently revamped one of its emblematic lineups to keep up with the current RGB trend. As the name conveys, the Viper Steel RGB series arrives with a redesigned heat spreader and RGB illumination.
The new series marks the second time that Patriot has incorporated RGB lighting onto its DDR4 offerings, with the first being the Viper RGB series that debuted as far back as 2018. While looks may be important, performance also plays a big role, and the Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 memory kit is here to show us what it is or isn’t made of.
Viper Steel RGB memory modules come with the standard black PCB with a matching matte-black heat spreader. It was nice on Patriot’s part to keep the aluminum heat spreader as clutter-free as possible. Only the golden Viper logo and the typical specification sticker is present on the heat spreader, and the latter is removable.
At 44mm (1.73 inches), the Viper Steel RGB isn’t excessively tall, so we expect it to fit under the majority of the CPU air coolers in the market. Nevertheless, we recommend you double-check that you have enough clearance space for the memory modules. The RGB light bar features five customizable lighting zones. Patriot doesn’t provide a program to control the illumination, so you’ll have to rely on your motherboard’s software. The compatibility list includes Asus Aura Sync, Gigabyte RGB Fusion, MSI Mystic Light Sync, and ASRock Polychrome Sync.
The Viper Steel RGB is a dual-channel 32GB memory kit, so you receive two 16GB memory modules with an eight-layer PCB and dual-rank design. Although Thaiphoon Burner picked up the integrated circuits (ICs) as Hynix chips, the software failed to identify the exact model. However, these should be AFR (A-die) ICs, more specifically H5AN8G8NAFR-VKC.
You’ll find the Viper Steel RGB defaulting to DDR4-2666 and 19-19-19-43 timings at stock operation. Enabling the XMP profile on the memory modules will get them to DDR4-3600 at 20-26-26-46. The DRAM voltage required for DDR4-3600 is 1.35V. For more on timings and frequency considerations, see our PC Memory 101 feature, as well as our How to Shop for RAM story.
Comparison Hardware
Memory Kit
Part Number
Capacity
Data Rate
Primary Timings
Voltage
Warranty
G.Skill Trident Z Royal
F4-4000C17D-32GTRGB
2 x 16GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
17-18-18-38 (2T)
1.40 Volts
Lifetime
Crucial Ballistix Max RGB
BLM2K16G40C18U4BL
2 x 16GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
18-19-19-39 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
G.Skill Trident Z Neo
F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
2 x 16GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
16-16-16-36 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
Klevv Bolt XR
KD4AGU880-36A180C
2 x 16GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
18-22-22-42 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
Patriot Viper Steel RGB
PVSR432G360C0K
2 x 16GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
20-26-26-46 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
Our Intel test system consists of an Intel Core i9-10900K and Asus ROG Maximus XII Apex on the 0901 firmware. On the opposite side, the AMD testbed leverages an AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and ASRock B550 Taichi with the 1.30 firmware. The MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Trio handles the graphical duties on both platforms.
Intel Performance
Image 1 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Things didn’t go well for the Viper Steel RGB on the Intel platform. The memory ranked at the bottom of our application RAM benchmarks and came in last place on the gaming tests. Our results didn’t reveal any particular workloads where the Viper Steel RGB stood out.
AMD Performance
Image 1 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The loose timings didn’t substantially hinder the Viper Steel RGB’s performance. Logically, it lagged behind its DDR4-3600 rivals that have tighter timings. The Viper Steel RGB’s data rate allowed it to run in a 1:1 ratio with our Ryzen 5 3600’s FCLK so it didn’t take any performance hits, unlike the DDR4-4000 offerings. With a capable Zen 3 processor that can operate with a 2,000 MHz FCLK, the Viper Steel RGB will probably not outperform the high-frequency kits.
Overclocking potential isn’t the Viper Steel RGB’s strongest trait. Upping the DRAM voltage from 1.35V to 1.45V only got us to DDR4-3800. Although we had to maintain the tRCD, tRP, and tRAS at their XMP values, we could drop the CAS Latency down to 17.
Lowest Stable Timings
Memory Kit
DDR4-3600 (1.45V)
DDR4-3800 (1.45V)
DDR4-4000 (1.45V)
DDR4-4133 (1.45V)
DDR4-4200 (1.45V)
G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 C16
13-14-14-35 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
19-19-19-39 (2T)
Crucial Ballistix Max RGB DDR4-4000 C18
N/A
N/A
16-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
20-20-20-40 (2T)
G.Skill Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 C17
N/A
N/A
15-16-16-36 (2T)
18-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
Klevv Bolt XR DDR4-3600 C18
16-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
N/A
18-22-22-42 (2T)
N/A
Patriot Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20
16-20-20-40 (2T)
17-26-26-46 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
As we’ve seen before, you won’t be able to run Hynix ICs at very tight timings. That’s not to say that the Viper Steel RGB doesn’t have any wiggle room though. With a 1.45V DRAM voltage, we optimized the memory to run at 16-20-20-40 as opposed to the XMP profile’s 20-26-26-46 timings.
Bottom Line
It comes as no surprise that the Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20 will not beat competing memory kits that have more optimized timings. The problem is that C20 is basically at the bottom of the barrel by DDR4-3600 standards.
The Viper Steel RGB won’t match or surpass the competition without serious manual tweaking. The memory kit’s hefty $199.99 price tag doesn’t do it any favors, either. To put it into perspective, the cheapest DDR4-3600 2x16GB memory kit on the market starts at $154.99, and it checks in with C18. Unless Patriot rethinks the pricing for the Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20, the memory kit will likely not be on anyone’s radar.
AMD’s 300-series motherboards were never part of the chipmaker’s support plan for Ryzen 5000 (Vermeer) processors. However, an avid enthusiast (via HKEPC) has modified ASRock’s firmware to support AMD’s latest Zen 3 chips.
First and foremost, it’s important to emphasize that it’s a Beta firmware, and an unofficial one at that, which doesn’t come from ASRock. An unknown source provided the firmware files to Hong Kong-based news outlet HKEPC for distribution. The publication has tested the firmware and confirmed that Ryzen 5000 processors indeed work without hiccups on the select few X370 ASRock motherboards. Of course, there are bound to be bugs or stability issues with unofficial firmware, although none have been reported so far that we know of. So, use at your own risk.
The altered firmwares are vailable for six ASRock X370 motherboards, including the X370 Gaming K4, X370 Gaming X, X370 Killer SLI, X370 Killer SLI/ac, X370 Taichi and Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming.
Getting Ryzen 5000 processors to work on unsupported motherboards is one thing. But yu’ll still be losing out on PCIe 4.0 functionality, one of the biggest selling points for Zen 3. Since X370 motherboards weren’t built with PCIe 4.0 in mind, you won’t be able to enjoy the fastest SSDs on the market. However, you will have access to Zen 3’s prowess though, which ushered in IPC uplifts up to 19%. That alone should be enough incentive to upgrade to the new Ryzen 5000 series. And if you can’t afford a new motherboard when doing so, this is at least an option to get things up and running–albeit one you should probably think long and hard about before flashing the board and dropping in your new chip.
If you haven’t gotten your hands on an Xbox Series X, you may be able to pick up one very soon, but without the RDNA 2 graphics, of course. The recently uncovered AMD 4700S Desktop Kit (via momomo_us) has found its way into a mini-ITX gaming PC at Tmall in China.
When the AMD 4700S emerged last week, the obscure processor raised a lot of questions. For one, the chip doesn’t carry the Ryzen branding, suggesting that it might be a custom processor that AMD developed for one of its clients. Stranger still, the processor is available for purchase as part of the AMD 4700S Desktop Kit.
Starting with what we know so far, the AMD 4700S is an octa-core Zen 2 processor with simultaneous multithreading (SMT). The Tmall merchant listed the AMD 4700S with 12MB of L3 cache, although we saw the chip with 8MB in a previous Geekbench 5 submission. The processor runs with a 3.6 GHz base clock and a 4 GHz boost clock. While we saw the AMD 4700S with 16GB of memory, we were uncertain of its nature. However, we suspected that the AMD 4700S is a variant of the processor that powers Microsoft’s latest Xbox Series X gaming console. The new mini-ITX listing appears to confirm our suspicions.
Apparently, the AMD 4700S is outfitted with 16GB of GDDR6 memory, which is the same amount of memory in the Xbox Series X. It appears that AMD is salvaging defective dies that don’t meet the requirements for the Xbox Series X and reselling them as the AMD 4700S.
Logically, AMD can’t just sell the same processor that it produces for Microsoft (for obvious reasons). Therefore, the AMD 4700S could be a result of a defective die with a faulty iGPU, similar to Intel’s graphics-less F-series chips. On the other hand, AMD could simply have disabled the iGPU inside the AMD 4700S, which is a shame given how generous GDDR6 memory is with bandwidth.
The only image of the mini-ITX system’s interior revealed a motherboard that looks like the same size as the Xbox Series X. There are no memory slots, and we can see some of the GDDR6 chips that surround the processor. Naturally, AMD reworked the motherboard for PC usage, as we can see by the addition of capacitors, passive heatsink, power connectors, and connectivity ports. Since the AMD 4700S lacks an iGPU, AMD added a PCIe 3.0 x16 expansion slot for a discrete graphics card.
AMD 4700S Benchmarks
Processor
Cinebench R20 Single-Core
Cinebench R20 Multi-Core
Cinebench R15 Single-Core
Cinebench R15 Multi-Core
Ryzen 7 4750G
411
4,785
199
2,085
AMD 4700S
486
3,965
160
1,612
Core i7-9700
508
3,643
200
1,469
Thanks to the listing, we can also get an idea of just how the processor inside the Xbox Series X performs compared to today’s desktop processors. However, it’s important to highlight that the AMD 4700S may not be the exact processor used in Microsoft’s latest console. The Series X uses a chip that runs at 3.8 GHz and 3.6 GHz when simultaneous multithreading is active. The AMD 4700S, on the other hand, clocks in a 3.6 GHz with a 4 GHz boost clock. On paper, the AMD 4700S should have faster compute cores since it doesn’t have an iGPU that eats into its power budget, so the heightened clock speeds make sense.
In general, the AMD 4700S lags behind the Ryzen 7 4750G (Renoir) and Core i7-9700 (Coffee Lake) in single-core workloads. The AMD 4700S did outperform the Core i7-9700 in multi-core workloads. However, it still placed behind the Ryzen 7 4750G.
It’s remains to be seen whether AMD is selling the AMD 4700S to retail customers or just OEMs. Thus far, we’ve seen the AMD 4700S Desktop Kit retailing for €263.71 (~$317.38) in at Tulostintavaratalo, a retailer in Finland. The Chinese mini-ITX gaming system is listed for 4,599 yuan or $709.12, but the price factors in the Radeon RX 550, 5TB SSD, CPU cooler, power supply and case.
High performance memory kits have evolved over the last few years, both in styling and technology. Styling has shifted to heavier heat sinks, LED light bars, and fancy RGB control software. The technology has done what it inevitably will by producing greater speeds and densities at generally lower cost as DDR4 has matured. The latest processors and graphics cards have been almost impossible to get over the last six months, but memory pricing and availability has remained steady, which makes now the perfect time for Acer to launch a brand-new line of DDR4 memory under their Predator brand. You may recognize the Predator brand from their highly successful gaming monitors or range of gaming laptops and desktops. You may even know the brand because of the Thanos All-In-One gaming chair.
Acer has branched out into a wide variety of gaming products and peripherals. Now, Acer is taking the plunge into core hardware with the aid of business partner BIWIN Storage, a large Chinese OEM with 25 years of experience in the storage and microelectronics business. Acer has granted them permission to produce memory kits under the Predator brand.
The Predator Apollo RGB kit I have for testing today is one of their top-spec kits: 16 GB (2x 8 GB) at 3600 MHz, 14-15-15-35 timings, and 1.45 V. 3600 MHz has become the new gold standard for Ryzen builds, driving new focus into memory kits targeting a previously obscure specification. Let’s see how the Predator Apollo RGB holds up in this ultra-competitive segment!
B450 Motherboard (Image credit: GS Group & Philax)
GS Group Holding and Philax have started manufacturing Russia’s first domestically-produced B450 motherboard. Philax plans to release at least 40,000 motherboards to the Russian market.
Philax specifically chose the B450M Pro4 because of the possibility to add a TPM module, which is important for government agencies. GS Group Holding and Philax’s partnership doesn’t just stop with motherboards, though. The duo also has plans to produce up to 50,000 monitors. There’s also an 18-month project to develop and produce motherboards for Russia’s homemade Elbrus and Baikal processors.
Avid enthusiasts will probably find Philax’s B450 motherboard very familiar. That’s because the design is based on ASRock’s B450M Pro4. Philax and ASRock probably reached an agreement for the latter to use the design, probably under a licensing agreement of some sort. Obviously, Philax’s rendition doesn’t carry the ASRock brand. In fact, it doesn’t even sport the model name.
Although the B450 chipset is a bit outdated, it’s compatible with a wide range of Ryzen processors and APUs, including the latest Ryzen 5000 (Vermeer) and Ryzen 4000 (Renoir) lineups. Adhering to the micro-ATX form factor, the motherboard comes with four DDR4 memory slots. It supports DDR4-3200 and above memory modules.
While not generous, the AM4 motherboard does come with the necessities. It provides four SATA III ports for standard hard drives and SSDs and up to two M.2 slots for high-speed drives. The expansion options on the B450 motherboard consist of two PCIe 3.0 x16 slots and one PCIe 2.0 x1 slot. The speed varies depending on the processor choice.
Ryzen APUs will be able to take advantage of the motherboard’s D-Sub, DVI-D, or HDMI port. Connectivity-wise, the B450 motherboard offers a PS/2 combo port, two USB 2.0 ports, four USB 3.1 Gen1 ports, and even USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-A and Type-C ports.
Intel’s new CEO Pat Gelsinger helmed his first full earnings call for the company yesterday, echoing other industry leaders in saying that the ongoing industry-wide chip shortages could last several more years. Intel also reported that it set a quarterly record for the most notebook PC chips sold in its history, but also reported a sudden slump in data center sales that found revenue dropping 20%, a record for the segment, as the number of units shipped and average selling prices both declined dramatically. Intel also posted its lowest profitability for its server segment in recent history, which surely is exacerbated by AMD’s continuing share gains and Intel’s resultant price cuts.
Intel’s first-quarter 2021 results were strong overall; the company raked in $18.6B in revenue, beating its January guidance by $1.1B (and analyst estimates). However, the impressive quarterly revenue is tempered by the fact that gross margins dropped to 58.4%, a 6.1 ppt decline year-over-year (YoY).
Chips shortages are top of mind, and Gelsinger said he expects the industry-wide chip shortages to last for several more years. A shortage of substrate materials and chip packaging capacity has hamstrung the industry, and Gelsinger said that Intel is bringing some of its chip packaging back in-house to improve its substrate supply. That new capacity comes online in Q2 and will “increase the availability of millions of units in 2021.”
Image 1 of 5
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 5
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 3 of 5
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 4 of 5
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 5 of 5
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel’s Client Computing Group (CCG), which produces both notebook and desktop PC chips, posted record notebook PC sales that were up 54% YoY. However, average selling prices (ASPs) dropped a surprising 20% YoY, which Intel chalked up to selling more lower-end devices, like low-end consumer and education (Chromebooks). Competitive pricing pressure from AMD’s Ryzen 5000 Mobile processors also surely comes into play here.
Meanwhile, desktop PC volumes dropped 4% YoY while average selling prices dropped 5%, a continuation of an ongoing trend that’s exacerbated by tough competition from AMD’s Ryzen 5000 processors. All told, that led to CCG revenue being up 8% YoY. Intel’s consumer chips now account for 59% of its revenue.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel’s Data Center Group (DCG) results were far less impressive. The unit’s $5.6B in revenue was down 20% YoY, and Intel also shipped 13% fewer units than last year. Intel chalks this up to cloud inventory digestion, meaning that companies that ordered large numbers of chips in the past are still deploying that inventory. This is the second quarter in a row Intel has cited this as a reason for lowered revenue.
Intel formally launched its Ice Lake Xeon processors earlier this month, and it isn’t unheard of for large customers to pause purchases in the months before large product launches that bring big performance and efficiency gains. A complex mix of other factors could also contribute, like cloud service providers moving to their own chip designs and possible continued market share gains by AMD. Still, Intel expects its server chips sales to rebound in the second half of the year. We’ll learn more when AMD releases its results, also with the market share reports that will arrive in a few weeks.
Intel’s average selling prices for its server chips also dropped 14%. Intel cites an increase in sales of lower-cost networking SoCs as a contributor, but the company has also cut pricing drastically to compete with AMD’s EPYC processors, which ultimately has an impact.
DCG operating margins weighed in at 23%, a record low for a segment that typically runs in the 40% range, with Intel citing the impact of its 10nm Xeon ramp as a contributor. It’s also noteworthy that 10nm is less profitable than Intel’s 14nm process, so moving from 14nm Cascade Lake to 10nm Ice Lake will further impact margins.
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel is moving forward with its plans to invest $20 billion this year as it expands its manufacturing capacity, with a good portion of that dedicated to its Intel Foundry Services (ISF) that will make chips for other companies, much like we see with other third-party foundries like TSMC. Gelsinger says Intel is engaging with 50+ potential customers already.
Gelsinger also noted that Intel has onboarded 2,000 new engineers this year and expects to bring on “several thousand” more later in the year. However, he didn’t provide a frame of reference as to how that compares to Intel’s normal hiring rate, which is an important distinction in an engineering-heavy company with over 110,000 employees.
Intel expects to ramp up its investments, and noted that it would reduce its stock buybacks as it plows more money into its investments. Intel guides for a 57% gross margin for the second quarter on $17.8B and a $1.05 EPS.
AMD has released its new Ryzen CPU Performance Guide for software developers that provides a set of tips and tools how to properly optimize programs for AMD’s processors. While the new version of the guide is tailored primarily for the latest Zen 3 microarchitecture as well as Ryzen 5000-series CPUs, this new set of tools can also increase performance of systems running previous-generation AMD processors.
All CPU vendors work closely with software developers to ensure that programs can take advantage of the latest technologies and capabilities of their hardware. Identifying performance bottlenecks, CPU under-utilization, thread contention, cross-core thread migration, etc that prevent hardware from delivering its best, can significantly boost performance on all types of processors no matter which microarchitecture they are based on.
AMD’s Ryzen CPU Performance Guide provides software developers with not only the necessary tools useful for performance boosting or identifying possible bottlenecks, but also valuable tips about memory usage, testing, compiling, debugging, and profiling. Many of AMD’s recommendations are general, so following them can increase performance not only on the latest AMD Zen 3-powered systems, but even on Intel-based PCs.
With a Zen 3-focused CPU Performance Guide released, it is reasonable to expect software developers to better optimize their programs for AMD’s latest processors. When to expect widespread availability of Zen 3-optimized apps depends on many factors. For obvious reasons, it is easier to optimize smaller projects with fewer bottlenecks and generally lower performance requirements. Meanwhile, performance-hungry applications usually get the greatest benefits from optimizations.
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro WiFi (Image credit: Gigabyte)
Hardware detective Tum_Apisak has uncovered a CPU-Z validation that exposes Gigabyte’s X570S Aorus Pro AX motherboard, lending credence to the rumor that AMD is preparing a chipset refresh. Gigabyte has already registered various X570S motherboards with the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC). It’s never a sure-thing that every model will hit the retail shelves, but at least we’re sure now that we’ll see the X570S Aorus Pro AX.
With the 500-series chipset, AMD went with an in-house design with licensed IP instead of just outcourcing the chipset design to ASMedia like the chipmaker has done in the past. The main reason why the X570 chipset relies on active cooling is due to the increased TDP from PCIe 4.0 support. While the X470 chipset only pulls around 6W, the consumer and enterprise variants of the X570 chipset draw up to 11W and 15W, respectively.
There hasn’t been any new clues as to what improvements the X570S chipset will bring over the current X570 chipset. The current speculation is that AMD has found a way to optimize the chipset so it doesn’t require the small cooling fan that AMD aficionados aren’t very fond of. Or perhaps AMD has hit ASMedia up to improve the existing design. For now, it’s anyone’s guess.
There are a couple of passive X570 motherboards on the market, such as the Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero or the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Xtreme. However, these motherboards are also quite expensive. If the X570S chipset is what we suspect, AMD will have paved the way for motherboard vendors to utilize the chipset in more budget-friendly offerings.
The X570S Aorus Pro AX could very well be a refresh of the current X570 Aorus Pro WiFi. The motherboard doesn’t have the “M” or “I” suffix in its name, so it likely adheres to the same ATX form factor. The “AX” designation obviously alludes to the motherboard featuring 802.11ax connectivity or Wi-Fi 6, however way you want to call it. The X570S Aorus Pro AX’s firmware dates back to March 20, meaning the motherboard is fresh out of the oven so it might not be long before we see an official announcement from AMD and its partners.
AMD Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Today we’ll dive in deep on the best memory settings for your Ryzen mobile laptop. Sequels don’t always live up to the originals, and that’s true even in the processor world. In AMD’s case, however, it’s the complete opposite. The Zen microarchitecture has unquestionably become an important building block for the chipmaker, and AMD has consistently delivered impressive gen-over-gen performance uplifts with every new Zen iteration.
Zen 3, the most recent installment in the Zen family, isn’t a microarchitecture to be underestimated, either. Ushering in major IPC upgrades up to 19%, Zen 3 processors have cemented their position on our current list of Best CPUs. The same Zen 3 prowess has made its way to the mobile market, and the latest Ryzen 5000 Mobile (Cezanne) chips power some of the most powerful laptops on the market today.
Memory doesn’t always receive the attention that it deserves, but it should. Memory has proven to play a meaningful role with the previous Ryzen 4000 (Renoir) processors. Ryzen 5000 retains a similar memory subsystem that supports DDR4-3200 or LPDDR4X-4266 memory. Some laptops fall into the first category as they provide conventional SO-DIMM memory slots to house the corresponding memory modules. Laptops in the second category come with memory chips permanently soldered to the motherboard, so expansion is out of the question. Hybrid designs feature the best of both worlds — both soldered memory and usually one empty SO-DIMM memory slot.
Unlike we see in desktop PCs, memory tuning still has a long way to go on Ryzen 5000 laptops. The memory options are permanently locked away, so there isn’t any liberty for users to play with memory timings. Furthermore, Ryzen 5000 laptops are constricted to SO-DIMM memory kits rated for 1.2V. However, our sources have whispered to us that Cezanne may finally change the panorama for tweakers. AMD is reportedly contemplating the possibility of opening memory tuning on Ryzen 5000 laptops and the ability to use SO-DIMM memory kits up to 1.35V. There is also talk of a full recovery mechanism similar to modern motherboards where it restores the device to factory default settings. That means that, in the event of an overclocking failure, you won’t have to worry about bricking your laptop.
XMG Core 15 (2021)
XMG Core 15 (2021) (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Hopping on to AMD’s Zen 3 train, XMG has brought the company’s emblematic Core 15 gaming laptop up to speed in terms of hardware. The XMG Core 15 (2021) retains the strong genes of a portable gaming and productivity workhouse. The new E21 iteration employs the best of what AMD and Nvidia currently have to offer and arrives with other upgrades, such as the 1920×1080 240 Hz or 2560×1440 165 Hz IPS panels.
Coming as no surprise, the XMG Core 15 (2021) leverages the new Ryzen 7 5800H, which is the direct successor to last generation’s Ryzen 7 4800H. Landing with eight Zen 3 cores with simultaneous multithreading (SMT), the Ryzen 5 5600H offers base and boost clock speeds up to 3.2 GHz and 4.4 GHz, respectively. With two SO-DIMM DDR4 memory slots, the Ryzen 7 5800H supports up to 64GB of DDR4-3200 memory.
The Ryzen 7 5800H brings with it eight Vega Compute Units (CUs) clocked at 2,000 MHz. The iGPU is great for everyday tasks and helps with battery life, but the supplementary GeForce RTX 3060 (Ampere) does all the heavy lifting when it comes to demanding graphical workloads. The Core 15 (2021) uses the 115W variant with an extra 15W headroom for Dynamic Boost 2.0. Specification-wise, the GeForce RTX 3060 wields 3,584 CUDA cores and 6GB of 14 Gbps GDDR6 memory to handle the most demanding triple-A titles.
When it comes to SO-DIMM memory, G.Skill’s Ripjaws lineup offers a wide variety of memory kits for consumers to choose from. G.Skill, who’s a repeating vendor on our list of Best RAM, sells its Ripjaws SO-DIMM memory as a standalone memory module as well as in dual-and quad-channel packages.
In the dual-channel presentations, the memory kits come in a capacity of 16GB (2x8GB), 32GB (2x16GB) and 64GB (2x32GB). The available memory frequencies range from DDR4-2133 to DDR4-3200. G.Skill backs its Ripjaws memory kits with a limited lifetime warranty, so they offer both performance and security for your investment.
Memory Scaling
Before we get into the RAM benchmarks, we observed a very peculiar behaviour with Ryzen 5000. Apparently, only memory that’s specifically clocked at DDR4-2933 and above runs at the 1T command rate (CR). It’s important to point this out because DDR4-2933 and DDR4-3200 will have a slight edge over the other memory frequencies since the lower-frequency memory kits were stuck at 2T. The behaviour seems weird since memory runs at 1T on the Ryzen 4000 (Renoir) platform regardless of the frequency.
We’ve reached out to an XMG representative regarding the issue. The official word is that the timing behaviour at memory speeds below DDR4-3200 is normal for AMD Cezanne (according to information from AMD). We also confirmed that the Memory SPD feature seems to be locked for Thaiphoon Burner and CPU-Z tools due to security consideration. No further details were given.
Image 1 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
For reference, DDR4-2133 is JEDEC’s baseline specification for DDR4 memory, while DDR4-3200 is the official supported memory frequency on Ryzen 5000. If we just look at the geometric mean, there was a 4.8% performance difference between the two settings. We used a mixed bag of workloads that both are and aren’t responsive to memory frequency, so it evens out. Be aware that individual performance gains could be higher, according to the specific workload.
In Adobe Photoshop and Premiere Pro, DDR4-3200 delivered up to 6.8% and 4.7% higher performance, respectively, over DDR4-2133. HandBrake was also sensitive to fast memory. DDR4-3200 reduced x264 and x265 conversion times by up to 5.22% and 5%, respectively.
7-Zip compression workloads benefitted the most from DDR4-3200 memory. It offered 19% better performance than DDR4-2133. However, DDR4-3200 wasn’t the absolute winner in every race, though. In the Corona 1.3 benchmark, for instance, DDR4-3200, DDR4-2933, and DDR4-2666 performed equally well.
Image 1 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
For our gaming tests, we used the native 1920×1080 (1080p) resolution for the XMG Core 15 (2021). We used the High preset in our games because the setting allowed a balance between image fidelity and performance. If you game at lower image settings, the performance boosts should be even higher because the graphics card becomes less of a bottleneck.
Overall, DDR4-3200 provided a 4.3% improvement in frame rates over DDR4-2133 across our suite of seven titles. There were a few games where DDR4-3200 presented a notable boost in performance: DDR4-3200 finished with 6% higher frame rates in Wolfenstein: Youngblood, 6.8% in Watch Dogs: Legion, and up to 15.2% in Far Cry Dawn.
Single-Rank vs. Dual-Rank
It’s easy to identify if a SO-DIMM memory module is single-rank or dual-rank before purchase. Without going into the technical specifics, memory modules that are 16GB generally adhere to a dual-rank design. We say generally because some vendors are currently commercializing 16GB single-rank memory modules. Nevertheless, we recommend that you consult with the specification sheet to corroborate the design.
Ryzen 5000 laptops that come equipped with two SO-DIMM memory slots bless users with the potential to add up to four total memory ranks. This requires two dual-rank memory modules, meaning 32GB (2x16GB) is the minimum amount of memory needed to maximize the number of memory ranks.
Image 1 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 14
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
When you increase the number of memory ranks, you also increase the total memory capacity in the process. Therefore, it’s important to bear in mind that some workloads profit more from the increased density than others, which results in higher performance.
If we look at the single SO-DIMM configurations, the 16GB (dual-rank) memory module improved performance by 9.6% over the 8GB (single-rank) memory module. The margin jumped to 10.6% with the 32GB (dual-rank) memory module. However, if we compare the 16GB memory module to the 32GB one, we only recorded a 0.9% difference. Going to 32GB doesn’t improve performance, but it helps if you’re a heavy multitasker.
We saw similar behavior with the dual-channel setups, although the performance margins weren’t as significant as the single SO-DIMM scenario. Four memory ranks (2x16GB) were only 3.3% better than two memory ranks (2x8GB). Meanwhile, the difference between the 2x16GB and 2x32GB configurations was still negligible.
The biggest takeaway is that running memory in a dual-channel configuration outweighed a single memory module even if the total number of memory ranks were equal. For instance, you achieve two memory ranks by using a single 16GB memory module or a pair of 8GB memory modules. Nevertheless, the latter option supplied 7.7% higher performance.
Image 1 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 8
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Scaling (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
A single 16GB memory module offered 7.4% higher frame rates than an 8GB memory module. The performance delta between the 16GB and 32GB memory modules was less than 2%, though. We noticed similar performance margins with the dual-channel configurations. The 2x16GB setup only outshined the 2x8GB and 2x32GB setups by 1.5% and 1.1%, respectively.
Dual-channel operation continued to play a significant role in gaming. The 2x8GB memory kit pumped out 7.3% higher frame rates than the single 16GB memory module, despite both having the same number of memory ranks.
Our Key Takeaways
DDR4-3200 is essentially the gold standard for Ryzen 5000 mobile processors. If money is tight, DDR4-2666 is the halfway point on the performance ladder. In either case, aim for the lowest timings possible. In the meantime, we’re stuck with SO-DIMM memory kits that don’t require XMP activation or 1.35V. However, this may change in the future if AMD opens memory tuning on Ryzen 5000 laptops.
Whenever possible, fill both SO-DIMM memory slots in your Ryzen laptop to take advantage of the performance boost from dual-channel operation. With equivalent memory ranks, you lose as much as 7.7% performance when running a single memory module as opposed to a dual-channel SO-DIMM memory kit. If your laptop only came with just one memory module and there’s an empty SO-DIMM slot, consider adding another memory module for a nice performance uplift.
Populating all four memory ranks is the ultimate configuration for application and gaming performance. The cheapest path to get to four memory ranks is a 32GB (2x16GB) memory kit, preferably DDR4-3200 if you want to maximize performance. For budget-conscious users, a 16GB (2×8) memory kit should suffice while allowing you to take advantage of dual-channel technology as well.
The Asus ZenBook 13 UM325SA packs some of the best value we’ve seen in an ultraportable yet, outperforming much more expensive Intel options thanks to new Ryzen 5000U chips.
For
+ Strong and cheap
+ OLED display
+ Surprisingly good audio
Against
– Need a dongle for a headphone jack
– Touch-based numpad feels gimmicky
The Asus ZenBook line usually tends to be a series of plain, mid-range ultraportables that hit respectable performance for strong value. The ZenBook 13 UM325SA ($749 to start, $999 as tested), is also somewhat unassuming and still maintains strong value, but its performance is anything but mid-range.
That’s thanks to its new Ryzen 5000U processor options, which bring the power of AMD’s latest CPU line to ultraportables and into competition with Intel’s 11th Gen “Tiger Lake” processors. The result is a stunningly strong computer that’s priced well below Intel and Apple alternatives, yet usually outperforms the former while coming within spitting range of the latter.
Asus ZenBook 13 Specs
CPU
AMD Ryzen 7 5800U
Graphics
AMD Integrated Radeon Vega Graphics
Memory
16GB DDR4-3733 MHz
Storage
1TB M.2 SSD
Display
13.3 inch, 1920 x 1080, OLED
Networking
802.11ax Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.0
Ports
2x USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C, 1x USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A, 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x microSD card reader
Camera
720p, IR
Battery
67Wh
Power Adapter
65W
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Dimensions(WxDxH)
11.97 x 7.99 x 0.55 inches
Weight
2.5 pounds
Price Range
$750 – $1000
Design of Asus ZenBook 13
Image 1 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Zenbook 13 is still a thin, light and minimally decorated machine that looks neither ostentatious nor exciting. Fitting that, color options include a blackish gray and a lighter, more metallic silver — the one we tested was gray.
The laptop’s lid is probably its most heavily decorated part, with a reflective, silvery Asus logo sitting off-center towards the laptop’s charging port side. A slight radial texture surrounds and emanates from the logo, although a glossy surface means it’s often covered by fingerprints. There’s also a small “Zenbook Series” logo on the laptop’s outer hinge.
Opening the laptop reveals a focus on functionality, as there’s not too much going on here visually aside from the chiclet-style keyboard and large touchpad. The keyboard does sit inside a sloping tray, which is nice, but what’s more noticeable is that opening the laptop’s lid also lifts the keyboard off your desk at up to a three-degree angle for easier typing.
The left side of the laptops houses two USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C ports and one HDMI 2.1 connection. The right side similarly has just a single USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A port and a microSD card reader. The big missing port is a 3.5 mm audio jack; you get a USB Type-C dongle in the box for that. You also get a USB Type-A dongle for RJ-45 Ethernet. Those adapters cut into the device’s portability. For instance, plugging in both dongles as well as the charger will use up all of your ports.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Zenbook 13 is on the smaller and lighter side when it comes to portability. At 11.97 x 7.99 x 0.55 inches and 2.5 pounds, it edges out similarly specced competitors on most measurements. The 13 inch MacBook Pro with an M1 chip is 11.97 x 8.36 x 0.61 inches and 3 pounds, while the HP Spectre x360 14 is 11.75 x 8.67 x 0.67 inches and 2.95 pounds. The Dell XPS 13 9310 comes the closest to giving the ZenBook decent competition on size, hitting 11.6 x 7.8 x 0.6 inches and 2.8 pounds.
Productivity Performance of Asus ZenBook 13
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA is our first time looking at a Ryzen 5000U series chip, which brings AMD’s latest CPU generation to the ultraportable market. While our Ryzen 7 5800U ZenBook 13 configuration with 16GB of RAM and 1TB M.2 SSD didn’t quite beat Apple’s new M1 chip, it generally outperformed Intel Tiger Lake ultraportables like the i7-1165G7 HP Spectre x360 14 and XPS 13 9310. The Ryzen 7 5800U has eight cores and 16 threads, while Intel’s U-series Tiger Lake processors go up to four cores and eight threads.
In Geekbench 5, which is a synthetic benchmark that attempts to capture general performance, the Asus ZenBook 13 hit 6,956 points in multi-core tests and 1,451 points in single-core tests. That’s above the 5,925 multi-core/1,316 single-core scores earned by the MacBook Pro with an M1 processor running Geekbench via Rosetta 2 emulation. The M1 running a native Geekbench test performed much higher, although native M1 Geekbench isn’t exactly comparable to what we ran on the ZenBook. The ZenBook also generally beats our Tiger Lake competition. For instance, the HP Spectre x360 14 earned 4,904 multi-core/1,462 single-core scores and the Dell XPS 13 9310 earned 5,319 multi-core/1,521 single-core scores. Those single-core scores are closer to our ZenBook’s output, but the laptops fall far enough behind on multi-core to outweigh that benefit in most cases.
The ZenBook 13 led the pack in file transfer speeds. When transferring 25GB of files, the ZenBook 13 did so at a rate of 1,068.21 MBps, while the XPS 13 9310 followed behind at a rate of 806.2 MBps. The MacBook Pro M1 hit a rate of 727.04 MBps, and the Spectre x360 14 trailed behind with a score of 533.61 MBps.
The ZenBook 13 and MacBook Pro M1 were significantly faster than our Tiger Lake machines in our Handbrake video-editing benchmark, which tracks how long it takes a device to transcode a video from 4K to FHD. The ZenBook 13 completed this task in 9:18 and the MacBook Pro M1 did it in 7:44. Meanwhile, the Spectre x360 14 and XPS 13 9310 were much slower with scores of 18:05 and 18:22, respectively.
We also ran our ZenBook 13 through Cinebench R23 for 20 runs in a row to stress test how well it operates under an extended load. The average score among these tests was 7,966.40, and the CPU ran at an average clock speed of 2.43 GHz and average temperature of 66.72 Celsius (152.1 Fahrenheit).
Display on Asus ZenBook 13
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Aside from a new Ryzen 5000U chip, the ZenBook 13 UM325SA also packs a new 1920 x 1080
OLED
display. That’s an improvement over 2020’s
Tiger Lake model
, which had an
IPS
-level screen.
I tested this display by watching The Falcon and the Winter Soldier and was impressed by the color and brightness, but a little disappointed by the screen’s viewing angles and reflectivity. While the red on Falcon’s outfit popped and shadows and other blacks were deep, I found that the image tended to wash out when looking at the screen from over 45 degrees away horizontally. Vertical angles were more generous, but the issue with horizontal angles persisted regardless of whether I watched in a high or low-light environment. I also found that even in low light environments, reflectivity was an issue, as I could frequently see my outline on the screen. Still, this didn’t outweigh the excellent color and brightness for me.
Our testing backed up my experience, with the ZenBook 13’s color only being beaten by the HP Spectre x360 14, which also had an OLED screen when we tested it. The ZenBook’s DCI-P3 color rating was 96.5%, while the Spectre’s was 139.7%. The MacBook Pro M1 had a much lower 78.3% DCI-P3 color rating, while the Dell XPS 13 9310 followed behind with a 69.4% DCI-P3 color rating.
The ZenBook was closer to the bottom of the pack in terms of brightness, though given that all of our competitors were also packing bright screens, this isn’t really a mark of low quality. It had 375 nits of average brightness, which is above the Spectre’s 339 nits, but below the MacBook Pro M1’s 435 nits score. The XPS 13 led the pack with a score of 469 nits, but any of the screens are still plenty bright.
Keyboard and Touchpad on Asus ZenBook 13
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA boasts a chiclet membrane keyboard that’s not too different from what you’ll find on most other ultraportables, but is nonetheless comfortable to use thanks to a slight angle and a cushiony feeling on keypresses.
The Zenbook’s lid is designed to lift its keyboard off your desk at up to a three-degree angle when opened, and while it doesn’t sound like much, that slight elevation helps for both comfort and typing accuracy. I wasn’t any faster than my typical 75 words-per-minute when typing on this keyboard, but I did find myself making fewer typos and my fingers didn’t feel as strained.
That comfort comes from keypresses that feel satisfyingly soft and pillowy, as well as wide keycaps that keep your fingers from feeling cramped or getting lost.
What’s perhaps more interesting than the keyboard is the touchpad, which is a generous 5.1 x 2.5 inches. It uses precision drivers and is perfectly smooth yet has enough friction for precise input, plus it tracks multi-touch gestures without issue. But that’s not what makes it interesting. What stands out here is the toggle-able touchscreen numpad built into it.
By holding the touchpad’s top-right corner for about a second, a numpad overlay will appear on the touchpad. You can still move your mouse cursor as usual in this mode, but you’ll also be able to tap on the overlay to input numbers as well as simple arithmetic commands like addition, subtraction and multiplication. Further, by swiping the touchpad’s top-left corner, your laptop will automatically open the calculator app.
This isn’t our first time seeing these features on a ZenBook, but they still remain novel here. The idea is to make up for the keyboard’s lack of a number pad, but unfortunately, this solution leaves much to be desired. The simplest issue is that touch input is unreliable and often requires users to self-correct by looking at what they’re touching. It also tends to lack comfort due to a lack of tactile feedback. Those two problems take away the major strengths tenkeys tend to have over number rows, but they’re not the only issue here.
While the numpad shortcut works well enough, the swipe to either bring up or dismiss the calculator can be finicky, and it’s not too unusual for it to not register a few times before working. It’s also unusual from a user experience perspective that the calculator shortcut uses a different input method than the numpad, and that the logo indicating where to swipe bears no resemblance to a calculator, but instead looks more like a social media share button.
While you can safely ignore the touch-based numpad without losing any utility over competitors, it doesn’t add much convenience to the device and comes across like a gimmick. At the very least, it does result in a larger touchpad than usual.
Audio on Asus ZenBook 13
The Asus ZenBook 13 UM325S comes with bottom-firing Harman Kardon speakers. And despite the ultrabook’s small size, they work well for both bass and volume.
I tested the ZenBook’s speakers by listening to Blinding Lights by The Weeknd, and they got loud enough at max volume to fill my whole 2-bedroom apartment, even through doors. Bass was also plenty present, capturing both the song’s drum beats and low synth without losing too much information. I couldn’t exactly feel it in my chest, but I also didn’t feel like part of the song was getting cut or drastically losing its impact, which is impressive on a laptop this size.
Unfortunately, the compromise here is that high notes did tend to get a little tinny as the volume got louder. While I had a decent listening experience at volumes lower than 60%, the distortion became noticeable and eventually annoying as I got higher than that level.
There’s also DTS audio software on board that lets you swap between different presets for music, movies and games, and lets you access a custom mode to boost certain parts of your audio like treble and bass. This mostly tended to affect sound mixing rather than quality, but helped me keep my general system volume down, which reduced tinniness to a minimum.
Upgradeability of Asus ZenBook 13
The ZenBook line has a history of being difficult to upgrade, and that’s the case here as well. That’s because some of the screws you’d need to remove to open up the device are hidden under the laptop’s feet. There’s no guarantee you’ll be able to get these feet back on after removal, so we skipped opening up the laptop for this review.
When we reached out to Asus, we were told that the ZenBook 13 UM325SA uses soldered RAM, though you can access and swap out the M.2 SSD if you wish.
However, given that you might end up having to replace your laptop’s feet in the process, we’d suggest being careful about your configuration choices before buying.
Battery Life of Asus ZenBook 13
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA enjoyed a long 13 hours and 36 minute battery life in our benchmark, which continuously streams video, browses the web and runs OpenGL tests over Wi-Fi at 150 nits of brightness. That put it well above the HP Spectre x360 14’s 7:14 score and the Dell XPS 13 9310’s 11:07, with only the MacBook Pro M1 beating it. That laptop lasted for 16:32.
Heat on Asus ZenBook 13
We took the ZenBook’s temperature after 15 minutes of YouTube videos, and found that the touchpad registered 73.4 degrees Celsius (164.12 Fahrenheit), the center of the keyboard between the G and H keys hit 83.3 degrees Celsius (181.94 Fahrenheit) and the laptop’s underside was mostly 84.7 degrees Celsius (184.46 Fahrenheit).
That said, the underside as a whole has a lot of surface area, and its rear-center (just in front of its underside vent) did hit 94.6 degrees Celsius (202.28 Fahrenheit).
Webcam on Asus ZenBook 13
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA has a single 720p webcam with IR capability for Windows Hello. While it has strong color accuracy, I found that photos I took with it suffered from low quality and a lot of artifacting. It also didn’t adjust well to heavy or low light.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The colors were natural, but it still almost feels as if I have a filter on. I’d be nervous taking an important work call on this device.
Software and Warranty of Asus ZenBook 13
The Asus ZenBook 13 UM325SA comes with minimal utility software, excluding the extended McAfee total protection trial that’s turned on by default when you get the system. We uninstalled this fairly early on, as some antivirus programs can lower benchmark performance.
Aside from that, you have DTS audio processing for swapping between different presets that tune the speakers for music, movies or gaming. You also have AMD Radeon software, where you can adjust your PC’s power mode, view usage stats for different components and launch games.
Most of Asus’ utility software limited to the MyAsus app, which lets you run diagnostics, troubleshoot, perform updates and the like, all from one place.
There’s also typical Windows pack-ins like Spotify, the weather app, and Microsoft Solitaire Collection.
Configurations of Asus ZenBook 13
We reviewed the ZenBook 13 UM325SA with a Ryzen 7 5800U processor, integrated Radeon Vega graphics, a 13.3-inch 1920 x 1080 OLED display, 16GB of LPDDR4X-3733 memory and a 1TB M.2 SSD. That’s the top configuration for the AMD version of this laptop.
Official pricing info is still a little undefined at the moment, though we’ve been told that the price range for this line of Zenbooks is $750 – $1000. We’d assume that our laptop would come in closer to the top of that range. CPU options for this laptop include the Ryzen 5 5500U, the Ryzen 5 5600U, the Ryzen 7 5700U and the Ryzen 7 5800U. Some of those CPUs are split between the UM325UA and UM325SA models, though there isn’t much difference on these devices other than that CPU selection.
You can also choose to lower your RAM and SSD capacities for a cheaper price, although Asus hasn’t given us details on available options as of publishing.
Bottom Line
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
AMD’s Ryzen processors have, as of late, had a reputation for strong productivity performance and value, and those features stand out in how the latest Asus ZenBook 13 leverages the new Ryzen 5800U chip. Despite costing a maximum of $1,000 at its highest configuration, it easily stands above Intel Tiger Lake competitors that reach as high as $1,600, all while touting a gorgeous OLED display.
In our productivity tests, the only ultraportable that beat the ZenBook 13 was the M1-equipped MacBook Pro 13, which we tested in an $1,899 configuration (and starts at $1,299). Yet despite costing slightly more than half of that price tag, the ZenBook was still in the MacBook’s general range, and never once lost to an Intel competitor.
Granted, some of those Intel competitors have special features. The HP Spectre x360 14 is a convertible, and the Dell XPS 13 has a premium design and a 1920 x 1200 resolution. But they also perform worse while costing more, and even though this ZenBook is still largely plain when it comes to bonuses, it does have a beautiful new OLED display.
There are a few quibbles here and there, like the slim port selection or the near-useless touch-based numpad. But overall, this device is the definition of punching above your weight class.
Twitter user InstLatX64 has discovered a mysterious AMD 4700S processor that’s evidently part of an AMD 4700S Desktop Kit. It’s plausible that the developer kit is the same one that Microsoft was utilizing to develop one of its Xbox consoles.
Although not officially a member of the Ryzen family, we suspect that the AMD 4700S probably takes after the Ryzen 4000 (Renoir) mobile APUs. If that’s the case, the AMD 4700S should be employing AMD’s Zen 2 cores, meaning this could be an engineering sample of the processor that powers the Xbox Series X or Series S.
The Xbox Series X and Series S utilize a custom octa-core AMD Zen 2 processor. Other than the clock speeds, no official name was given to the chip. The one inside the Series X features a 3.8 GHz clock speed and 3.6 GHz clock with SMT, while the variant for the Series S is clocked at 3.6 GHz with a 3.4 GHz SMT clock.
A Geekbench 5 submission (via Leakbench), which dates back to March 29, shows the AMD 4700S with an eight-core, 16-thread configuration and 8MB of L3 cache. The obscure processor’s specifications coincide with mobile Renoir for sure. The AMD 4700S seemingly sports a 3.6 GHz base clock and 4 GHz boost clock. The desktop kit reportedly comes equipped with 16GB of memory as well.
The AMD 4700S scored 998 points and 8,589 points in the single-and multi-core benchmarks, respectively. For comparison, the Ryzen 9 4900HS, which is the Ryzen 4000 flagship, averaged 1,083 points in the single-core test and 6,994 points in the multi-core test. While the Ryzen 9 4900HS delivered up to 8.5% higher single-core performance, the AMD 4700S offered up to 22.8% higher multi-core performance.
What’s even stranger is that AMD recently released the firmware and corresponding drivers for the AMD 4700S Desktop Kit. There are drivers for the chipset, onboard audio and the Ethernet port. Digging a bit into the firmware, we found mentions of Cardinal, which could be the internal codename that AMD is using for this particular desktop kit. The files are dated yesterday (April 19), so they are very fresh.
Developer kits aren’t typically available to the general public. However, Finnish retailer Tulostintavaratalo has listed the AMD 4700S 8-Core Desktop Kit on its online store for €263.71 (~$317.38) with a delivery time spanning from 14 to 30 working days. While the AMD 4700S remains a mystery, it does appear that AMD is selling it in the retail channels.
There’s no doubt that the Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 is a speedy memory kit. Unfortunately, the hefty price tag will probably scare off potential buyers.
It’s hard not to know Acer – it’s one of the more prominent mainstream brands in the computer industry. However, the company’s Predator sub-brand might not ring a bell for the typical computer user that’s not into gaming. Nonetheless, the Predator label is home to Acer’s premium gaming PCs, laptops, monitors, and chairs. To further expand its reach, Acer has created Predator Storage, a new family of high-performance storage and memory products that target enthusiasts and gamers alike.
Acer won’t actually manage Predator Storage, though. Following in HP’s footsteps, Acer has handed the reins over to Chinese OEM Biwin Storage to manufacture and commercialize Predator-branded memory and SSDs on its behalf in the United States and Canadian markets. Today marks Predator Storage’s first venture into the memory market. The sub-brand debuts with its Apollo RGB series of gaming memory that offers frequencies ranging from DDR4-3200 up to DDR4-5000.
Image 1 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Predator Apollo RGB memory modules sport an aluminum heat spreader for effective heat dissipation. According to the brand, the design takes after a cyberpunk theme. It features a two-tone paint job with a mixture of black and silver colors and is carved in such a way that it exposes the majority of the LED diffuser. However, one thing to consider is that the Predator Apollo RGB measures 51.4mm (2.02 inches) tall, so you’ll need to make sure you have the necessary clearance space for the memory modules, especially if you’re using a large CPU air cooler.
As with any modern-day gaming memory, the Predator Apollo RGB is equipped with RGB lighting that you can configure to your heart’s content. Software isn’t provided for such purposes, but the memory is compatible with all the major RGB ecosystems, including Asus Aura Sync, Gigabyte RGB Fusion 2.0, MSI Mystic Light Sync, and ASRock Polychrome Sync.
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Our Predator Apollo RGB memory kit checks in at an unorthodox data rate of DDR4-4500. There are so few DDR4-4500 memory kits on the market that we can count them with the fingers of one hand. As you can tell by now, the Predator Apollo RGB is a dual-channel 16GB memory kit, so it consists of two DDR4 memory modules with a density of 8GB each. The memory modules are based on a single-rank design and are manufactured with a 10-layer PCB and 15μm gold-plated contacts.
Leveraging Samsung’s K4A8G085WB-BCPB (B-die) ICs, the Predator Apollo RGB is rated for DDR4-4500 at 19-19-19-39 timings with a 1.45V DRAM voltage requirement. When the XMP 2.0 profile for the advertised speed isn’t active, the memory modules default to DDR4-2133 with automatic timings at 15-15-15-36. For more on timings and frequency considerations, see our PC Memory 101 feature, as well as our How to Shop for RAM story.
Comparison Hardware
Memory Kit
Part Number
Capacity
Data Rate
Primary Timings
Voltage
Warranty
Thermaltake ToughRAM RGB
R009D408GX2-4600C19A
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4600 (XMP)
19-26-26-45 (2T)
1.50
Lifetime
Predator Apollo RGB
BL.9BWWR.255
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4500 (XMP)
19-19-19-39 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
Patriot Viper 4 Blackout
PVB416G440C8K
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4400 (XMP)
18-26-26-46 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
Klevv Cras XR RGB
KD48GU880-40B190Z
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
19-25-25-45 (2T)
1.40
Lifetime
TeamGroup T-Force Xtreem ARGB
TF10D416G3600HC14CDC01
2 x 8GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
14-15-15-35 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
Our Intel test system consists of an Intel Core i9-10900K and Asus ROG Maximus XII Apex on the 0901 firmware. On the opposite side, the AMD testbed leverages an AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and ASRock B550 Taichi with the 1.30 firmware. The MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Trio is the main graphics card in our RAM benchmarks.
Intel Performance
Image 1 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Apollo RGB kit performed as expected on the Intel platform. The memory struggled against rivals with lower frequencies and optimized timings. However, it was surprising to see that the Apollo RGB even bested the T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14 kit, even if it’s only by a couple of points. The Apollo RGB ranked second place in the gaming chart.
AMD Performance
Image 1 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
On the contrary, the Apollo RGB memory performed best on the AMD platform. The memory kit managed to defeat all the memory kits, except for the T-Force Dark Z FPS DDR4-4000 C16 memory kit. Gaming on the AMD platform also favored Predator Storage’s kit as it jumped up to the top of the gaming chart.
Overclocking and Latency Tuning
Image 1 of 3
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Despite leveraging Samsung B-die ICs, increasing the DRAM voltage to 1.5V didn’t get us anywhere. Bumping it to 1.55V, however, allowed us to overclock the memory to DDR4-4600. In the process, we also dropped the timings from 19-19-19-39 to 18-18-18-38.
Lowest Stable Timings
Memory Kit
DDR4-3600 (1.46V)
DDR4-4000 (1.45V)
DDR4-4200 (1.45V)
DDR4-4400 (1.45V)
DDR4-4500 (1.55V)
DDR4-4600 (1.55V)
DDR4-4666 (1.56V)
Thermaltake ToughRAM RGB DDR4-4600 C19
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
18-24-24-44 (2T)
20-26-26-45 (2T)
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
18-18-18-38 (2T)
18-18-18-38 (2T)
N/A
Patriot Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-4400 C18
N/A
N/A
N/A
17-25-25-45 (2T)
21-26-26-46 (2T)
N/A
N/A
Klev Cras XR RGB DDR4-4000 C19
N/A
18-22-22-42 (2T)
N/A
19-25-25-45 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
TeamGroup T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14
13-14-14-35 (2T)
N/A
19-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
If you’re perfectly satisfied with DDR4-4500, the Apollo RGB kit is very happy with a 1.5V DRAM voltage and tight timings of 18-18-18-38. That was the lowest we could push the memory before instability kicked in.
Bottom Line
The first time is always the hardest, and despite being the company’s first foray into the memory market, Predator Storage did a good job with the Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 kit. We won’t delve into the memory’s aesthetics since it’s a subjective matter. Performance-wise, the Apollo RGB will not disappoint, but it will have a hard time contending with some DDR4-4000 and above memory kits with tight timings, more specifically on Intel platforms. In its favor, the Apollo RGB does feature high-quality Samsung B-die ICs, so overclocking and tweaking are definitely on the menu, but your mileage will vary.
The Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 kit’s price tag will be the hardest thing to swallow for most consumers. The MSRP for the memory kit is $299.99, so it’s on the more expensive end of the spectrum. It’s hard to consider the Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 at current pricing, especially when you have tough competitors, like Patriot’s Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-4400 C18 that only sets you back $134.99. However, hardware doesn’t always retail at the manufacturer’s established MSRP, especially when it comes to products like memory that tend to have volatile pricing, so it remains to be seen if the Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 will maintain the $299.99 price tag when it lands at retailers this month.
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.
