Intel kicked off 2021 with a fresh lineup of mobile processors with a unique twist. The 11th Gen Tiger Lake H35-series processors aren’t just for any ol’ laptop. They target what Intel calls “ultraportable gaming laptops.” And at 3 p.m. ET today on The Tom’s Hardware Show, we’re sitting down with the chipmaker to learn more about what that means.
The Tom’s Hardware Show livestream is every Thursday at 3 p.m. ET. Today, Intel’s general manager of premium and gaming notebook segments, Fredrik Hamberger, will join Tom’s Hardware editors to give us an inside look at Intel’s H35 chips.
You can watch today’s Tom’s Hardware show below at 3 p.m. ET:
You can also catch the show on Facebook and the Tom’s Hardware Twitch channel. Every episode is also available to download as a podcast.
And like with any episode of The Tom’s Hardware Show, we’ll be taking questions from the audience. Join the livestream at 3 p.m. ET to submit your questions via chat YouTube or Facebook, and we may discuss them on air.
Announced during CES 2021 in January, Intel’s H35 CPUs go up to four CPU cores, eight threads and a 35W TDP. The flagship Core i7-11375H Special Edition can hit a 5.0 single-core turbo frequency and has a standard base clock speed of 3.3 GHz at 35W (it drops to 3.0 GHz at 28W).
Intel is positioning the H35 series as an option for the growing number of machines looking to compete with the best gaming laptops by including a discrete graphics cards while remaining portable. Our Asus TUF Dash F15 review showed what the quad-core Core i7-1130H can do alongside a mobile RTX 3070 graphics card in a 0.78-inch thick clamshell.
Join Tom’s Hardware this afternoon to learn more and ask Intel your H35 queries.
Commell has unveiled one of the industry’s first Pico-ITX motherboards featuring Intel’s Tiger Lake-UP3 processor with built-in Iris Xe graphics core. Not designed to compete with the best motherboards for PCs, The tiny LP-179 board is aimed primarily at embedded systems, yet it can enable everyone to build an ultra-compact form-factor (UCFF) desktop featuring a decent quad-core CPU with an advanced GPU.
Commell’s LP-179 motherboard will initially be available with Intel’s Core i7-1185G7E (4C/8T, 1.80/4.40GHz, 12MB cache, 96 EU, 15W) or Celeron 6305E (2C/2T, 1.80GHz, 4MB cache, 48 EU, 15W) processor addressing premium and entry-level markets. The SoC may be accompanied by up to 32GB of DDR4-3200 memory using one SO-DIMM module, an M.2-2280 SSD featuring a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, and one SATA drive.
The tiny LP-179 — which measures 100×72 mm — has a rather decent connectivity department that includes an M.2-2230 slot for a Bluetooth + Wi-Fi adapter, two GbE ports (2.5 GbE Intel I225-LM, GbE I219-LM), two display outputs (one DisplayPort, one HDMI) and two USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A ports. Being aimed at embedded systems, Commell’s internal headers for USB 2.0, RS232, audio (controlled by the Realtek ALC262 chip), SMBus, a battery, and an LVDS or VGA.
(Image credit: Commell)
Motherboards from companies like Commell are rarely available in retail, but it is still possible to get them from stores like Alibaba, usually together with Pico-ITX cases. In addition, LP-179 boards will likely find themselves inside various UCFF PCs from second and third tier makers.
Pricing of Commell’s LP179 motherboards has not been announced.
Parties that need a midrange 11th Generation Core SoC, can opt for Core i5-1145GRE/1145G7E and Core i3-1115GRE/1115G4E, yet these boards will be built-to-order.
The HP Spectre x360 has an attractive design and long battery life, though the 16:9 display feels dated. Its only performance downside is in bursty workloads, which we saw some issues with.
For
Sliim, attractive chassis
Solid speakers for a laptop
Long battery life
Still squeezes in a USB Type-A port
Against
16:9 display is dated, especially as a tablet
Not great with bursty performance
Difficult to upgrade
Sure, the
best ultrabooks and premium laptops
are tools, but you also want your computing device to look good. Design is important, after all.
The HP Spectre 360 13t ($949.99 to start, $1,249.99 as tested) continues to be one of the best-looking Windows devices out there, with a refined, thin design and clever port placement with both Thunderbolt 4 and USB Type-A.
But a tool also has to do the job well. With a 16:9 screen, the Spectre x360 can still, well, compute, but it doesn’t show as much as some others. And then there’s the question of whether or not this laptop can tame Intel’s latest Tiger Lake processors.
Design of the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
HP’s Spectre lineup has had an aesthetic that would make a jeweler proud for the last few years. The Spectre x360 13t is no different there. The laptop, made from silver aluminum (it comes in black or blue for an extra cost), and has a reflective, modernized HP logo that I think the company should really start using on all of its products. But what makes it stand out are the cut-off corners near the back hinge, one of which has the power button while the other houses a Thunderbolt 4 port.
Those corners are always accessible, and easy enough to reach whether the laptop is being used as a notebook or a tablet.
The 13.3-inch display has very thin bezels, but looks short and squat with a 16:9 aspect ratio. As more notebooks move to taller 16:10 displays, like the
Dell XPS 13
and
MacBook Pro
or a 3:2 display like the
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3
, it makes the whole design here, not just the screen, seem a little cramped and dated. (HP does have a 3:2 Spectre x360 with the 14-inch version of this laptop, which we hope to be able to test soon.)
HP has packed in a full-size keyboard, including a row for home, page up, page down and end keys, and the rest of the construction is aluminum. This thing is built solid.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
While thicker notebooks may have more ports, HP hasn’t given up on USB Type-A here, which I really appreciate. The left side of the notebook has a USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A with a drop-jaw hinge to squeeze it into the chassis, as well as a 3.5 mm headphone jack. The right side has two Thunderbolt 4 ports (one in the top-right corner), a kill switch for the camera, and a microSD card reader.
The Spectre x360 13 measures 12.08 x 7.66 x 0.67 inches and weighs 2.8 pounds. That makes it ever so slightly lighter than the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 9310, which is 2.9 pounds and 11.6 x 8.15 x 0.56 inches. The Asus ZenBook Flip S UX371 is a slighter 2.7 pounds and 12 x 7.3 x 0.6 inches. Apple’s MacBook Pro, a clamshell, is 3 pounds and 11.97 x 8.36 x 0.61 inches.
HP Spectre x360 13-inch Specifications
CPU
Intel Core i7-1165G7
Graphics
Intel Iris Xe Graphics
Memory
16GB LPDDR4X-4266
Storage
512GB PCIe NVMe SSD with 32GB Intel Optane
Display
13.3-inch, 1920 x 1080 IPS touchscreen
Networking
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX 201 (2×2) and Bluetooth 5
Ports
2x Thunderbolt 4, USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A, Headphone/microphone jack, microSD card reader
Camera
720p IR
Battery
60 WHr
Power Adapter
65 W
Operating System
Windows 10 Home
Dimensions(WxDxH)
12.08 x 7.66 x 0.67 inches / 306.83 x 194.56 x 17.01 mm
Weight
2.8 pounds / 1.27 kg
Price (as configured)
$1,249.99
Productivity Performance HP Spectre x360 13-inch
The Spectre is the latest machine we’ve tested with Intel’s Core i7-1165G7 “Tiger Lake” mobile processors. Our configuration of the 2-in-1 has paired that with 16GB of RAM, a 512GB Intel SSD and 32GB of Intel Optane memory.
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)
On comparable versions of Geekbench 5, an overall performance benchmark, the Spectre had a single core-score of 1,574 and a multi-core score of 4,749. The ZenBook Flip S had a higher multi-core score (4,952) but a lower single-core score (1,512) with the same CPU. The Dell XPS 13 2-in-1, also with the same Core i7, has a far higher multi-core score (5,639) but a lower single-core score (1,532). On the same test, the MacBook Pro had a multi-core score of 5,925 and a single-core score of 1,316, and that was through Rosetta emulation that can decrease performance.
The Spectre transferred 25GB of files at a rate of 452.62 MBps, edging out the XPS 13 2-in-1. But the ZenBook Flip S out-performed here at 979.37
It took the Spectre x360 18 minutes and 39 seconds to complete our Handbrake test, which transcodes a 4K video to 1080p. That’s faster than the ZenBook, though the XPS 13 2-in-1 had it beat, while the MacBook Pro was more than five minutes faster than the Spectre, even through Rosetta 2 emulation.
We also ran the Spectre through our stress test, which runs Cinebench R23 twenty times on a loop. The results were largely in the high 3,000’s, occasionally peaking over 4,000. Towards the end, it was a bit erratic. The CPU ran at an average of 2.52 GHz and an average temperature of 64.88 degrees Celsius (148.78 degrees Fahrenheit). HWInfo’s monitoring software detected several instances of cores’ power limits being exceeded.
Display on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch Specifications
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Our review unit has a 13.3-inch, 1920 x 1080 touchscreen with a 16:9 aspect ratio. That seems a bit squat, even outdated, compared to some competitors, which have moved on to 16:10 or 3:2 displays that are taller and show more of your work at once. It’s also more natural for tablet mode.
Part of my testing included watching the trailer for The Falcon and The Winter Soldier. Some explosions early in the trailer showed some intense burst of orange, though some scenes on a football field had fireworks that didn’t pop against the night sky as much as I would have liked to see. It’s usable, but not the best I’ve seen.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Spectre’s IPS display covered 67.7% of the DCI-P3 color gamut, in the range of the XPS 13 2-in-1 (70%). We reviewed the ZenBook Flip S with an OLED display that hit 113.1% (you can get the Spectre with OLED; see configurations below). Apple’s 13-inch MacBook Pro reached 78.3%.
HP’s display measured an average of 391 nits of brightness, beating the ZenBook, but falling short of the MacBook Pro and the XPS 13 2-in-1.
Keyboard and Touchpad on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The keyboard on the Spectre x360 is comfortable, with a satisfying click (at least, as far as membranes go), that bounces up in a responsive fashion.
My bigger issue was the wristrest. The deck is a bit short, so my hands hung off it while I typed. I hit 88 words per minute on the 10fastfingers.com typing test, which is a bit low for me; I’m generally in the high 90’s. It wasn’t because of the keyboard, but because I was floating my wrists in the air. A taller screen would require a longer deck, which could help solve this.
I would prefer that the 4.4 x 2.2 inch touchpad be a bit taller, but there’s also not any room for that on the device. Still, the vertical height was slightly limiting, and I often hit the edge of it. That said, the precision touchpad is sensitive enough that I was able to perform gestures, even with four fingers, without any issues.
Audio on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
For such a trim device, HP is offering up decent quality sound. The bottom-firing speakers, tuned by Bang & Olufsen, were clear with detailed sound. In Yellowcard’s “City of Devils,” the mix of violins, guitars, cymbals and drums were well leveled and textured, though, like many laptops, the bass wasn’t particularly perceptible.
The included Bang & Olufsen Audio control app helped that a bit when I switched to the Bass equalizer preset, but I preferred the overall mix of the default settings, which better highlighted the violins and vocals.
Upgradeability of the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
There are only two visible screws (a pair of Torx) on the bottom of the Spectre x360. If only things were that easy.
There are four additional Phillips-head screws beneath one of the laptop’s two adhesive-backed rubber feet. Removing the foot could potentially rip or tear it, making it difficult to replace later, so the average person probably shouldn’t attempt to open the laptop up.
Per HP’s maintenance manual for this laptop, the battery, Wi-Fi card and SSD are all replaceable if you do get in there, though the RAM is soldered down.
For most people, we recommend ensuring you get the configuration with enough storage and RAM to future proof it for you. Enthusiasts who can risk that rubber foot will find some upgradeable and repairable parts inside.
Battery Life on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
This 2-in-1 has some endurance. While it comes with a nice USB Type-C charger with a braided cable, you should be able to go quite a while without it. The Spectre ran for 12 hours and 32 minutes on our battery test, which continuously browses the web, runs OpenGL tests and streams video over Wi-Fi, all at 150 nits of brightness.
It outlased both the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1, which ran for 10:52, and the Asus ZenBook Flip S, which lasted 8:11. But Apple’s MacBook Pro, powered by its incredibly-efficient M1 processor, lasted four hours longer at 16:32.
Heat on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
Beyond internal temperatures, we took skin temperatures while we ran our Cinebench R23 stress test.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The center of the keyboard, between the G andH keys, measured 36.2 degrees Celsius (97.16 degrees Fahrenheit), though the keyboard was a cooler 29 degrees Celsius.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The hottest point on the bottom of the laptop hit 41.7 degrees Celsius (107.06 degrees Fahrenheit).
Webcam on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
The 720p camera in the Spectre x360’s bezel produces blurry images and doesn’t capture color well. In a shot at my desk, My blue eyes looked dark, my orange shirt muted, and the whole image was covered in visual noise.
Is it usable? Sure. But you may also want to consider buying best webcams for improved image quality. There’s a kill switch on the right side of the laptop for extra privacy when you’re not using the webcam.
Software and Warranty on the HP Spectre x360 13-inch
Most of the software preinstalled on the Spectre is from HP itself. The most important is HP Command Center, a one-stop-shop to choose between performance presets, network prioritization for applications and system information. The others include HP Support Assistant (which I think could be rolled into Command Center), HP Privacy Settings and a link to the user manual for the laptop. There’s also MyHP, which gives you easy access to your serial numbers and a bunch of short tutorials for Windows and Microsoft Office.
Of course, there’s still the bloat that comes with most Windows 10 installs, like Spotify, Hulu, Roblox and Hidden City: Hidden Object Adventure.
HP sells the 13-inch Spectre x360 with a 1-year warranty that can be extended at an additional cost.
HP Spectre x360 13-inch Configurations
We tested the Spectre x360 with an Intel Core i7-1165G7, 16GB of RAM, 512GB of storage with 32GB of Intel Optane memory and a 1920 x 1080 IPS touchscreen. All of that comes for $1,249.99.
The base model is $949.99, with an Intel Core i5-1135G7, 8GB of RAM, a 1080p screen and a 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Many of the components are configurable. You can go up to a
4K
UHD OLED touch screen (add $180), or opt for FHD
OLED
(add $30) or even WLED with Sure View Privacy (a $60 extra.) Storage goes up to a 2TB PCIe SSD. If you don’t want the silver color, you can pay $10 for black or $20 extra for blue.
The most expensive version, with a “Poseidon blue” chassis, Windows 10 Pro and the maximum specs runs $1,869.99.
Bottom Line
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
In its latest iteration, the 13-inch HP Spectre x360 continues to be an attractive choice, quite literally. The Spectre remains one of the best-looking notebooks on the market, and it’s sleek and trim. Its battery life is impressive, and the Bang & Olufsen audio is pretty good for a 2-in-1 laptop.
While many ultrabook owners may not use their laptops for the most intense workloads, those who do may notice the issues we saw in our Cinebench gauntlet. That’s not a huge issue for day-to-day use, but enthusiasts or power users may seek other options.
If you’re looking for a convertible 2-in-1, the go-to continues to be the
Dell XPS 13 2-in-1
, which offers strong performance and a taller, 16:10 display that works better as a tablet. You will, however, give up the full-sized USB Type-A port. HP also offers a comfier keyboard, in this author’s opinion, though a short wrist rest mars the typing experience.
But if a mix of style and endurace strikes your fancy, the Spectre x360 should be under consideration, though I’m hoping we can check out the 14-inch, 3:2 version soon.
In November 2020, Apple announced M1. By the end of the year, it announced three devices — the MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, and the Mac Mini — that ditched Intel’s processors.
Those devices received largely positive reviews based on benchmark performance and battery life. But Intel has also released its 11th Gen “Tiger Lake” processors, and after several months of silence, now it’s firing back at Apple. Slides from the Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker shows how it tested, and why it thinks Windows 10 laptops can beat back Apple’s ARM-based solution.
Below, we are publishing the slides in full (minus a title slide, be sure to look through the galleries), as well as our analysis. Intel shared benchmarks for the chips, but as with all vendor-provided benchmarks, take them with a grain of salt.
Intel’s Performance Claims
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
For pure productivity performance, Intel’s testing eschews typical benchmarks. Sure, it used Principled Technologies’ WebXPRT 3, but the Microsoft Office 365 tests appear to be based on Intel’s internal RUG (real-world usage guideline) tests. Intel claims the 11th-Gen system, an internal whitebox with an Intel Core i7-1185G7 and 16GB of RAM, is 30% faster overall in Chrome and faster in every Office task. This largely goes against what we saw in our 13-inch
MacBook Pro with M1 review
, where benchmarks showed M1 to be largely on the same level, if not better.
For what it’s worth, in most laptops, we’ve seen the companies that make them opt for the Core i7-1165G7. We’ve only seen the 1185G7 in one production laptop, the
MSI Prestige 14 Evo
.
Intel also claims that the i7-1185G7 is six times faster than M1 on AI-tools from Topaz Labs and Adobe Premiere, Photoshop and Lightroom functions. (Again, using the company’s internal RUG tests).
Gaming was a mix, with Intel and Apple trading blows with integrated graphics. But Intel also got a little snarky, placing Apple at 0 frames per second for a number of games that don’t currently work on macOS and the M1 CPU. Apple’s ecosystem hasn’t been a hardcore gaming platform for years now, especially after 32-bit app support was cut in macOS 10.15 Catalina.
It’s unclear how many people are playing some of the listed games, like Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, Halo: The Master Chief Collection, Crysis Remastered or Red Dead Redemption 2 on Intel’s integrated Xe graphics, but yes, the point is made – Windows PCs have far larger collections of triple-A games.
Intel Evo vs. Apple M1
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Intel)
When Intel revealed
Evo
, its second-generation upgrade to Project Athena to make the best portable devices, it included a number of experiences from studies that it believed would create the best notebooks. So when evaluating M1, it used those tests.
Intel claims that the M1 in the MacBook Pro it tested failed eight out of 25 tests it uses, including “Switch to Calendar” in Outlook, “start video conference” in Zoom, and “Select picture Menu” in PowerPoint. Intel’s workloads don’t explain how these are run, but they’re also simple tasks that work quite well on just about any modern processor, so they’re odd choices. (I had plenty of Zoom conferences while testing the MacBook Pro with no issue.)
Interestingly, in the configurations document at the end of the slides, Intel shows that it switched to a MacBook Pro with 8GB of RAM, rather than the 16GB model it tested for performance.
In battery life, Intel switched to an Intel Core i7-1165G7 notebook, the Acer Swift 5, rather than sticking with the Core i7-1185G7 in the whitebook it used for performance testing. It also tested a MacBook Air. They ran Netflix streams and tabs and found the MacBook Air came ahead with a six-minute difference.
Intel didn’t list battery life for the MacBook Pro.
In our tests,
that beat Intel PCs by hours.
The Form Factor Argument
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
There has been an interesting debate among Mac users for a long time about whether or not Apple should add a touchscreen to MacBooks. It hasn’t, and left that on the iPad.
Per Intel’s slides, a Windows machine offers more choice, including 2-in-1s, desktops, small form-factor desktops, desktops with touchscreens, and even easels. This is somewhat odd, considering Apple does offer a small desktop (the Mac Mini), as well as various desktops in the iMac and the Mac Pro, and Apple has promised that its own chips will land there, too. Touchscreens and convertible 2-in-1s are the big areas where Apple lacks.
The second slide about choice shows the various form factors and configurations. And yes, Apple’s laptops are limited to clamshells. Interestingly, Intel only includes the MacBook Pro on this list, and not the MacBook Air, which starts at $999 with an M1, 8GB and 256GB of memory. That’s less than the Dell XPS 13 listed at $1,499 and has a higher display resolution. However, it is right that the MacBook Pro can get expensive at higher configurations, and certainly about the fact that Apple’s port selection on the 13-inch MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air is lacking.
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel also took a dig at the M1’s display capabilities. The slide is right – both the M1 MacBook Pro and MacBook Air only support one external display, up to 6K at 60 Hz. (This isn’t the case for the Mac Mini desktop, which also has an HDMI 2.0 port.)
Some users have found a workaround by using DisplayLink drivers and docks, but it is a weak point, especially for the Pro-branded notebook.
Compatibility
Apple includes Rosetta 2 to emulate x86 software on the Mac, but some software just doesn’t support M1. Intel includes games, again, as a weak point, as well as a lack of support for Boot Camp.
It also suggests many accessories won’t work. This is somewhat true. The M1 laptops don’t support external graphics docks, and some software won’t work on the Mac. (For instance, Razer recently announced a docking station that doesn’t have RGB lighting control because Synapse doesn’t currently work on the Mac).
Perhaps the Xbox controller wasn’t fully supported when Intel tested, but PS5 and Xbox Series X/S controller support showed up in the beta for macOS 11.3, so it’s on the way.
It’s definitely showing a disadvantage to early adoption, though many people use headphones, hard drives and other accessories that don’t require software to use.
Intel has made a similar argument about software. To a degree, again, this is true; not all software works. In my experience, I found anything that ran through Rosetta 2 seemed fairly seamless. Since then, more native software has become available or announced. For instance, Box, which is listed as incompatible, has called the issue a “High priority investigation.”
The other angle here is that the Mac has a devoted league of developers that make software only for Apple’s platform. So, in that case, people using M1 are likely to use some of that software, or Apple’s alternatives. Others, like Google Drive, are also available on the web.
On the Adobe front, Lightroom currently runs natively on M1, while the company has promised native versions of its other software.
So Intel does make some points here, but it seems far less about the M1’s capability and more about being an early adopter.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Intel)
Notes and Disclaimers
Intel included these, so we’re including them here for the sake of transparency.
The company makes some good points about the current state of Apple’s chip initiative, especially if you demand a specialized form factor or play games casually.
Intel’s performance claims need to be taken with a certain grain of salt, as they’re in Intel-created tests and not industry-standard benchmarks. The fact that it switched out between the Pro and the Air for battery life (as well as the Core i7-1185G7 and Core i7-1165G7) also shows an incomplete picture.
Intel’s thoughts on software and compatibility get a bit tricky. Early adopters may feel a bit of a sting, but it’s been rapidly improving, and much of the software that doesn’t work at all may be counteracted with Apple software.
The slides paint two pictures: Yes, Apple has work to do in this transition, and the touchscreen, multi-display support, and limited port selection need to be fixed. But the fact that Intel went through putting these slides together also shows that it sees a formidable opponent worth comparing its chips against, suggesting a competitive future for notebooks.
Intel’s 12th-Gen Alder Lake chip will bring the company’s hybrid architecture, which combines a mix of larger high-performance cores paired with smaller high-efficiency cores, to desktop x86 PCs for the first time. That represents a massive strategic shift as Intel looks to regain the uncontested performance lead against AMD’s Ryzen 5000 series processors. AMD’s Zen 3 architecture has taken the lead in our Best CPUs and CPU Benchmarks hierarchy, partly on the strength of their higher core counts. That’s not to mention Apple’s M1 processors that feature a similar hybrid design and come with explosive performance improvements of their own.
Intel’s Alder Lake brings disruptive new architectures and reportedly supports features like PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 that leapfrog AMD and Apple in connectivity technology, but the new chips come with significant risks. It all starts with a new way of thinking, at least as far as x86 chips are concerned, of pairing high-performance and high-efficiency cores within a single chip. That well-traveled design philosophy powers billions of Arm chips, often referred to as Big.Little (Intel calls its implementation Big-Bigger), but it’s a first for x86 desktop PCs.
Intel has confirmed that its Golden Cove architecture powers Alder Lake’s ‘big’ high-performance cores, while the ‘small’ Atom efficiency cores come with the Gracemont architecture, making for a dizzying number of possible processor configurations. Intel will etch the cores on its 10nm Enhanced SuperFin process, marking the company’s first truly new node for the desktop since 14nm debuted six long years ago.
As with the launch of any new processor, Intel has a lot riding on Alder Lake. However, the move to a hybrid architecture is unquestionably riskier than prior technology transitions because it requires operating system and software optimizations to achieve maximum performance and efficiency. It’s unclear how unoptimized code will impact performance.
In either case, Intel is going all-in: Intel will reunify its desktop and mobile lines with Alder Lake, and we could even see the design come to the company’s high-end desktop (HEDT) lineup.
Intel might have a few tricks up its sleeve, though. Intel paved the way for hybrid x86 designs with its Lakefield chips, the first such chips to come to market, and established a beachhead in terms of both Windows and software support. Lakefield really wasn’t a performance stunner, though, due to a focus on lower-end mobile devices where power efficiency is key. In contrast, Intel says it will tune Alder Lake for high-performance, a must for desktop PCs and high-end notebooks. There are also signs that some models will come with only the big cores active, which should perform exceedingly well in gaming.
(Image credit: Intel Alder Lake-S Demo)
Meanwhile, Apple’s potent M1 processors with their Arm-based design have brought a step function improvement in both performance and power consumption over competing x86 chips. Much of that success comes from Arm’s long-standing support for hybrid architectures and the requisite software optimizations. Comparatively, Intel’s efforts to enable the same tightly-knit level of support are still in the opening stages.
Potent adversaries challenge Intel on both sides. Apple’s M1 processors have set a high bar for hybrid designs, outperforming all other processors in their class with the promise of more powerful designs to come. Meanwhile, AMD’s Ryzen 5000 chips have taken the lead in every metric that matters over Intel’s aging Skylake derivatives.
Intel certainly needs a come-from-behind design to thoroughly unseat its competitors, swinging the tables back in its favor like the Conroe chips did back in 2006 when the Core architecture debuted with a ~40% performance advantage that cemented Intel’s dominance for a decade. Intel’s Raja Koduri has already likened the transition to Alder Lake with the debut of Core, suggesting that Alder Lake could indeed be a Conroe-esque moment.
In the meantime, Intel’s Rocket Lake will arrive later this month, and all signs point to the new chips overtaking AMD in single-threaded performance. However, they’ll still trail in multi-core workloads due to Rocket Lake’s maximum of eight cores, while AMD has 16-core models for the mainstream desktop. That makes Alder Lake exceedingly important as Intel looks to regain its performance lead in the desktop PC and laptop markets.
While Intel hasn’t shared many of the details on the new chip, plenty of unofficial details have come to light over the last few months, giving us a broad indication of Intel’s vision for the future. Let’s dive in.
Intel’s 12th-Gen Alder Lake At a Glance
Qualification and production in the second half of 2021
Hybrid x86 design with a mix of big and small cores (Golden Cove/Gracemont)
10nm Enhanced SuperFin process
LGA1700 socket requires new motherboards
PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 support rumored
Four variants: -S for desktop PCs, -P for mobile, -M for low-power devices, -L Atom replacement
Gen12 Xe integrated graphics
New hardware-guided operating system scheduler tuned for high performance
Intel Alder Lake Release Date
(Image credit: Intel via YouTube)
Intel hasn’t given a specific date for Alder Lake’s debut, but it has said that the chips will be validated for production for desktop PCs and notebooks with the volume production ramp beginning in the second half of the year. That means the first salvo of chips could land in late 2021, though it might also end up being early 2022. Given the slew of benchmark submissions and operating system patches we’ve seen, early silicon is obviously already in the hands of OEMs and various ecosystem partners.
Intel and its partners also have plenty of incentive to get the new platform and CPUs out as soon as possible, and we could have a similar situation to 2015’s short-lived Broadwell desktop CPUs that were almost immediately replaced by Skylake. Rocket Lake seems competitive on performance, but the existing Comet Lake chips (e.g. i9-10900K) already use a lot of power, and i9-11900K doesn’t look to change that. With Enhanced SuperFIN, Intel could dramatically cut power requirements while improving performance.
Intel Alder Lake Specifications and Families
Intel hasn’t released the official specifications of the Alder Lake processors, but a recent update to the SiSoft Sandra benchmark software, along with listings to the open-source Coreboot (a lightweight motherboard firmware option), have given us plenty of clues to work with.
The Coreboot listing outlines various combinations of the big and little cores in different chip models, with some models even using only the larger cores (possibly for high-performance gaming models). The information suggests four configurations with -S, -P, and -M designators, and an -L variant has also emerged:
Alder Lake-S: Desktop PCs
Alder Lake-P: High-performance notebooks
Alder Lake-M: Low-power devices
Alder Lake-L: Listed as “Small Core” Processors (Atom)
Intel Alder Lake-S Desktop PC Specifications
Alder Lake-S*
Big + Small Cores
Cores / Threads
GPU
8 + 8
16 / 24
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
8 + 6
14 / 22
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
8 + 4
12 / 20
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
8 + 2
10 / 18
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
8 + 0
8 / 16
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
6 + 8
14 / 20
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
6 + 6
12 / 18
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
6 + 4
10 / 16
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
6 + 2
8 / 14
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
6 + 0
6 / 12
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
4 + 0
4 / 8
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
2 + 0
2 / 4
GT1 – Gen12 32EU
*Intel has not officially confirmed these configurations. Not all models may come to market. Listings assume all models have Hyper-Threading enabled on the large cores.
Intel’s 10nm Alder Lake combines large Golden Cove cores that support Hyper-Threading (Intel’s branded version of SMT, symmetric multi-threading, that allows two threads to run on a single core) with smaller single-threaded Atom cores. That means some models could come with seemingly-odd distributions of cores and threads. We’ll jump into the process technology a bit later.
As we can see above, a potential flagship model would come with eight Hyper-Threading enabled ‘big’ cores and eight single-threaded ‘small’ cores, for a total of 24 threads. Logically we could expect the 8 + 8 configuration to fall into the Core i9 classification, while 8 + 4 could land as Core i7, and 6 + 8 and 4 + 0 could fall into Core i5 and i3 families, respectively. Naturally, it’s impossible to know how Intel will carve up its product stack due to the completely new paradigm of the hybrid x86 design.
We’re still quite far from knowing particular model names, as recent submissions to public-facing benchmark databases list the chips as “Intel Corporation Alder Lake Client Platform” but use ‘0000’ identifier strings in place of the model name and number. This indicates the silicon is still in the early phases of testing, and newer steppings will eventually progress to production-class processors with identifiable model names.
Given that these engineering samples (ES) chips are still in the qualification stage, we can expect drastic alterations to clock rates and overall performance as Intel dials in the silicon. It’s best to use the test submissions for general information only, as they rarely represent final performance.
The 16-core desktop model has been spotted in benchmarks with a 1.8 GHz base and 4.0 GHz boost clock speed, but we can expect that to increase in the future. For example, a 14-core 20-thread Alder Lake-P model was recently spotted at 4.7 GHz. We would expect clock rates to be even higher for the desktop models, possibly even reaching or exceeding 5.0 GHz on the ‘big’ cores due to a higher thermal budget.
Meanwhile, it’s widely thought that the smaller efficiency cores will come with lower clock rates, but current benchmarks and utilities don’t enumerate the second set of cores with a separate frequency domain, meaning we’ll have to wait for proper software support before we can learn clock rates for the efficiency cores.
We do know from Coreboot patches that Alder Lake-S supports two eight-lane PCIe 5.0 connections and two four-lane PCIe 4.0 connections, for a total of 24 lanes. Conversely, Alder Lake-P dials back connectivity due to its more mobile-centric nature and has a single eight-lane PCIe 5.0 connection along with two four-lane PCIe 4.0 interfaces. There have also been concrete signs of support for DDR5 memory. There are some caveats, though, which you can read about in the motherboard section.
Intel Alder Lake-P and Alder Lake-M Mobile Processor Specifications
Alder Lake-P* Alder Lake-M*
Big + Small Cores
Cores / Threads
GPU
6 + 8
14 / 20
GT2 Gen12 96EU
6 + 4
10 / 14
GT2 Gen12 96EU
4 + 8
12 / 16
GT2 Gen12 96EU
2 + 8
10 / 12
GT2 Gen12 96EU
2 + 4
6 / 8
GT2 Gen12 96EU
2 + 0
2 / 4
GT2 Gen12 96EU
*Intel has not officially confirmed these configurations. Not all models may come to market. Listings assume all models have Hyper-Threading enabled on the large cores.
The Alder Lake-P processors are listed as laptop chips, so we’ll probably see those debut in a wide range of notebooks that range from thin-and-light form factors up to high-end gaming notebooks. As you’ll notice above, all of these processors purportedly come armed with Intel’s Gen 12 Xe architecture in a GT2 configuration, imparting 96 EUs across the range of chips. That’s a doubling of execution units over the desktop chips and could indicate a focus on reducing the need for discrete graphics chips.
There is precious little information available for the -M variants, but they’re thought to be destined for lower-power devices and serve as a replacement for Lakefield chips. We do know from recent patches that Alder Lake-M comes with reduced I/O support, which we’ll cover below.
Finally, an Alder Lake-L version has been added to the Linux kernel, classifying the chips as ‘”Small Core” Processors (Atom),’ but we haven’t seen other mentions of this configuration elsewhere.
Intel Alder Lake 600-Series Motherboards, LGA 1700 Socket, DDR5 and PCIe 5.0
(Image credit: VideoCardz)
Intel’s incessant motherboard upgrades, which require new sockets or restrict support within existing sockets, have earned the company plenty of criticism from the enthusiast community – especially given AMD’s long line of AM4-compatible processors. That trend will continue with a new requirement for LGA 1200 sockets and the 600-series chipset for Alder Lake. Still, if rumors hold true, Intel will stick to the new socket for at least the next generation of processors (7nm Meteor Lake) and possibly for an additional generation beyond that, rivaling AMD’s AM4 longevity.
Last year, an Intel document revealed an LGA 1700 interposer for its Alder Lake-S test platform, confirming that the rumored socket will likely house the new chips. Months later, an image surfaced at VideoCardz, showing an Alder Lake-S chip and the 37.5 x 45.0mm socket dimensions. That’s noticeably larger than the current-gen LGA 1200’s 37.5 x 37.5mm.
Because the LGA 2077 socket is bigger than the current sockets used in LGA 1151/LGA 1200 motherboards, existing coolers will be incompatible, but we expect that cooler conversion kits could accommodate the larger socket. Naturally, the larger socket is needed to accommodate 500 more pins than the LGA 1200 socket. Those pins are needed to support newer interfaces, like PCIe 5.0 and DDR5, among other purposes, like power delivery.
PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 support are both listed in patch notes, possibly giving Intel a connectivity advantage over competing chips, but there are a lot of considerations involved with these big technology transitions. As we saw with the move from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0, a step up to a faster PCIe interface requires thicker motherboards (more layers) to accommodate wider lane spacing, more robust materials, and retimers due to stricter trace length requirements. All of these factors conspire to increase cost.
(Image credit: VideoCardz)
We recently spoke with Microchip, which develops PCIe 5.0 switches, and the company tells us that, as a general statement, we can expect those same PCIe 4.0 requirements to become more arduous for motherboards with a PCIe 5.0 interface, particularly because they will require retimers for even shorter lane lengths and even thicker motherboards. That means we could see yet another jump in motherboard pricing over what the industry already absorbed with the move to PCIe 4.0. Additionally, PCIe 5.0 also consumes more power, which will present challenges in mobile form factors.
Both Microchip and the PCI-SIG standards body tell us that PCIe 5.0 adoption is expected to come to the high-performance server market and workstations first, largely because of the increased cost and power consumption. That isn’t a good fit for consumer devices considering the slim performance advantages in lighter workloads. That means that while Alder Lake may support PCIe 5.0, it’s possible that we could see the first implementations run at standard PCIe 4.0 signaling rates.
Intel took a similar tactic with its Tiger Lake processors – while the chips internal pathways are designed to accommodate the increased throughput of the DDR5 interface via a dual ring bus, they came to market with DDR4 memory controllers, with the option of swapping in new DDR5 controllers in the future. We could see a similar approach with PCIe 4.0, with the first devices using existing controller tech, or the PCIe 5.0 controllers merely defaulting to PCIe 4.0.
Benchmarks have surfaced that indicate that Alder Lake supports DDR5 memory, but like the PCIe 5.0 interface, but it also remains to be seen if Intel will enable it on the leading wave of processors. Notably, every transition to a newer memory interface has resulted in higher up-front DIMM pricing, which is concerning in the price-sensitive desktop PC market.
DDR5 is in the opening stages; some vendors, like Adata, TeamGroup, and Micron, have already begun shipping modules. The inaugural modules are expected to run in the DDR5-4800 to DDR5-6400 range. The JEDEC spec tops out at DDR5-8400, but as with DDR4, it will take some time before we see those peak speeds. Notably, several of these vendors have reported that they don’t expect the transition to DDR5 to happen until early 2022.
While the details are hazy around the separation of the Alder Lake-S, -P, -M, and -L variants, some details have emerged about the I/O allocations via Coreboot patches:
Alder Lake-P
Alder Lake-M
Alder Lake-S
CPU PCIe
One PCIe 5.0 x8 / Two PCIe 4.0 x4
Unknown
Two PCIe 5.0 x8 / Two PCIe 4.0 x4
PCH
ADP_P
ADP_M
ADP_S
PCH PCIe Ports
12
10
28
SATA Ports
6
3
6
We don’t have any information for the Alder Lake-L configuration, so it remains shrouded in mystery. However, as we can see above, the PCIe, PCH, and SATA allocations vary by the model, based on the target market. Notably, the Alder Lake-P configuration is destined for mobile devices.
Intel 12th-Gen Alder Lake Xe LP Integrated Graphics
A series of Geekbench test submissions have given us a rough outline of the graphics accommodations for a few of the Alder Lake chips. Recent Linux patches indicate the chips feature the same Gen12 Xe LP architecture as Tiger Lake, though there is a distinct possibility of a change to the sub-architecture (12.1, 12.2, etc.). Also, there are listings for a GT0.5 configuration in Intel’s media driver, but that is a new paradigm in Intel’s naming convention so we aren’t sure of the details yet.
The Alder Lake-S processors come armed with the 32 EUs (256 shaders) in a GT1 configuration, and the iGPU on early samples run at 1.5 GHz. We’ve also seen Alder Lake-P benchmarks with the GT2 configuration, which means they come with 96 EUs (768 shaders). The early Xe LP iGPU silicon on the -P model runs at 1.15GHz, but as with all engineering samples, that could change with shipping models.
Alder Lake’s integrated GPUs support up to five display outputs (eDP, dual HDMI, and Dual DP++), and support the same encoding/decoding features as both Rocket Lake and Tiger Lake, including AV1 8-bit and 10-bit decode, 12-bit VP9, and 12-bit HEVC.
Intel Alder Lake CPU Architecture and 10nm Enhanced SuperFin Process
Intel pioneered the x86 hybrid architecture with its Lakefield chips, with those inaugural models coming with one Sunny Cove core paired with four Atom Tremont cores.
Compared to Lakefield, both the high- and low-performance Alder Lake-S cores take a step forward to newer microarchitectures. Alder Lake-S actually jumps forward two ‘Cove’ generations compared to the ‘big’ Sunny Cove cores found in Lakefield. The big Golden Cove cores come with increased single-threaded performance, AI performance, Network and 5G performance, and improved security features compared to the Willow Cove cores that debuted with Tiger Lake.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Alder Lake’s smaller Gracemont cores jump forward a single Atom generation and offer the benefit of being more power and area efficient (perf/mm^2) than the larger Golden Cove cores. Gracemont also comes with increased vector performance, a nod to an obvious addition of some level of AVX support (likely AVX2). Intel also lists improved single-threaded performance for the Gracemont cores.
It’s unclear whether Intel will use its Foveros 3D packaging for the chips. This 3D chip-stacking technique reduces the footprint of the chip package, as seen with the Lakefield chips. However, given the large LGA 1700 socket, that type of packaging seems unlikely for the desktop PC variants. We could see some Alder Lake-P, -M, or -L chips employ Foveros packaging, but that remains to be seen.
(Image credit: Intel)
Lakefield served as a proving ground not only for Intel’s 3D Foveros packaging tech but also for the software and operating system ecosystem. At its Architecture Day, Intel outlined the performance gains above for the Lakefield chips to highlight the promise of hybrid design. Still, the results come with an important caveat: These types of performance improvements are only available through both hardware and operating system optimizations.
Due to the use of both faster and slower cores that are both optimized for different voltage/frequency profiles, unlocking the maximum performance and efficiency requires the operating system and applications to have an awareness of the chip topology to ensure workloads (threads) land in the correct core based upon the type of application.
For instance, if a latency-sensitive workload like web browsing lands in a slower core, performance will suffer. Likewise, if a background task is scheduled into the fast core, some of the potential power efficiency gains are lost. There’s already work underway in both Windows and various applications to support that technique via a hardware-guided OS scheduler.
The current format for Intel’s Lakefield relies upon both cores supporting the same instruction set. Alder Lake’s larger Golden Cove cores support AVX-512, but it appears that those instructions will be disabled to accommodate the fact that the Atom Gracemont cores do not support the instructions. There is a notable caveat that any of the SKUs that come with only big cores might still support the instructions.
Intel Chief Architect Raja Koduri mentioned that a new “next-generation” hardware-guided OS scheduler that’s optimized for performance would debut with Alder Lake, but didn’t provide further details. This next-gen OS scheduler could add in support for targeting cores with specific instruction sets to support a split implementation, but that remains to be seen.
Intel fabs Alder Lake on its Enhanced 10nm SuperFin process. This is the second-generation of Intel’s SuperFin process, which you can learn more about in our deep-dive coverage.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel says the first 10nm SuperFin process provides the largest intra-node performance improvement in the company’s history, unlocking higher frequencies and lower power consumption than the first version of its 10nm node. Intel says the net effect is the same amount of performance uplift that the company would normally expect from a whole series of intra-node “+” revisions, but in just one shot. As such, Intel claims these transistors mark the largest single intra-node improvement in the company’s history.
The 10nm SuperFin transistors have what Intel calls breakthrough technology that includes a new thin barrier that reduces interconnect resistance by 30%, improved gate pitch so the transistor can drive higher current, and enhanced source/drain elements that lower resistance and improve strain. Intel also added a Super MIM capacitor that drives a 5X increase in capacitance, reducing vDroop. That’s important, particularly to avoid localized brownouts during heavy vectorized workloads and also to maintain higher clock speeds.
During its Architecture Day, Intel teased the next-gen variant of SuperFin, dubbed ’10nm Enhanced SuperFin,’ saying that this new process was tweaked to increase interconnect and general performance, particularly for data center parts (technically, this is 10nm+++, but we won’t quibble over an arguably clearer naming convention). This is the process used for Alder Lake, but unfortunately, Intel’s descriptions were vague, so we’ll have to wait to learn more.
We know that the 16-core models come armed with 30MB of L3 cache, while the 14-core / 24 thread chip has 24MB of L3 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache. However, it is unclear how this cache is partitioned between the two types of cores, which leaves many questions unanswered.
Alder Lake also supports new instructions, like Architectural LBRs, HLAT, and SERIALIZE commands, which you can read more about here. Alder Lake also purportedly supports AVX2 VNNI, which “replicates existing AVX512 computational SP (FP32) instructions using FP16 instead of FP32 for ~2X performance gain.” This rapid math support could be part of Intel’s solution for the lack of AVX-512 support for chips with both big and small cores, but it hasn’t been officially confirmed.
Intel 12th-Generation Alder Lake Price
Intel’s Alder Lake is at least ten months away, so pricing is the wild card. Intel has boosted its 10nm production capacity tremendously over the course of 2020 and hasn’t suffered any recent shortages of its 10nm processors. That means that Intel should have enough production capacity to keep costs within reasonable expectations, but predicting Intel’s 10nm supply simply isn’t reasonable given the complete lack of substantive information on the matter.
However, Intel has proven with its Comet Lake, Ice Lake, and Cooper Lake processors that it is willing to lose margin in order to preserve its market share, and surprisingly, Intel’s recent price adjustments have given Comet Lake a solid value proposition compared to AMD’s Ryzen 5000 chips.
We can only hope that trend continues, but if Alder Lake brings forth both PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 support as expected, we could be looking at exceptionally pricey memory and motherboard accommodations.
As reported yesterday, Intel’s first discrete graphics cards for desktops in more than two decades will not be available at retail and will only be sold as parts of pre-built mainstream systems. Apparently, they will also only be compatible with select Intel platforms and will not work with AMD’s CPUs at all.
Intel says that only systems running its 9th- and 10th-Gen Core processors on motherboards powered by its B460, H410, B365, and H310C chipset are compatible with its graphics card. According to the chip giant, platforms need a special BIOS to work with its DG1 solution. As a result, Intel’s Iris Xe graphics boards will not work with AMD-based systems, as well as Intel’s advanced machines featuring its Z-series chipsets.
Intel’s Iris Xe standalone graphics board for desktop PCs and the Iris Xe Max discrete GPU for notebooks are based on the company’s Xe-LP architecture that is also used for Tiger Lake’s integrated GPUs. Since the Xe-LP architecture was designed primarily for iGPUs (and to get the ecosystem ready for Xe-HP and Xe-HPG graphics processors), even its standalone DG1 versions don’t really offer decent performance in demanding modern games, but could still serve well inside entry-level PCs used for work and media.
Since entry-level graphics cards are not particularly popular at retail, but there are a bunch of CPUs in the channel that do not feature Intel’s latest Xe graphics, the company apparently decided to reserve its Iris Xe discrete graphics cards for OEMs and only sell them as parts of pre-built PCs. As a matter of fact, there are a bunch of entry-level desktops with low-end graphics cards. These boards don’t consume a lot of power, yet are still noticeably better than many integrated solutions — especially previous generation UHD 630 graphics.
Intel’s statement reads as follows:
“Please note that the Iris Xe add-in card will be paired with 9th Gen (Coffee Lake-S) and 10th Gen (Comet Lake-S) Intel Core desktop processors and Intel B460, H410, B365, and H310C chipset-based motherboards and sold as part of pre-built systems. These motherboards require a special BIOS that supports Intel Iris Xe, so the cards won’t be compatible in other systems.”
One of the reasons why Intel might limit the compatibility of its DG1 graphics board to select systems is to ensure that it will not have to support and ensure compatibility with many PC configurations, which will lower its costs. As an added bonus, it will not provide a low-end graphics option to cheap platforms running entry-level AMD processors. Whatever the reasoning behind restricting the dedicated Xe DG1 cards to specific motherboards, it doesn’t suggest a lot of confidence behind the product. Why buy a DG1 when plenty of previous generation budget GPUs are still around?
We’ve known about Intel Xe Graphics for ages, and the integrated Xe LP variant has been shipping in Tiger Lake laptops since last fall. Raja Koduri, Intel’s senior VP of Architecture, Graphics, and Software, has tweeted various images of Xe HP chips in the past. Today, he posted a die shot of the upcoming Xe HPC version, presumably meaning 7nm Ponte Vecchio. Specs are sort of unknown, though we have plenty of clues about what the final product will have in terms of specs.
The above image is the dual-chiplet variant, with the two halves connected via EMIB (Embedded Multi-die Interconnect Bridge). Around the outside of the two main GPU blocks are a bunch of supporting chips, and that’s where things get interesting. The rectangles aren’t all the same size, and there are five chips for each GPU. What are these chips, and what are the specs for each? It’s hard to say.
Raja mentions “7 advanced silicon technologies in a single package.” Some of these are easier to guess at than others; Foveros, EMIB, SuperFIN, Rambo Cache, HBM, and Compute Tiles have all been mentioned as being part of Xe HP. That’s six items, so we’re missing one, and it’s entirely possible Raja’s list is slightly different.
The two chips are inverted versions of each other in the die shot, mostly, but the blocks on the right are more square-shaped (200×216 pixels) than the blocks on the left (174×216 pixels). Then we have the top-left chip (186×138 pixels) and the bottom-right chip (218×138 pixels). Perhaps Intel is doing some creative image editing to obscure the chip dimensions, but then why post the image in the first place?
We do know that Intel is using its Foveros 3D chip stacking technology with Ponte Vecchio. Given the asymmetrical chip sizes, there are probably three different chips that contain one or more of the “tiles” that Intel has previously mentioned. Each chip could contain one or more of: HBM2, Rambo Cache, or Compute. But right now, we don’t know how Intel is distributing things.
As for the main GPU block, the die is blacked out, but we have a decent idea of what to expect, and the blocked out sections are easier to guess at. The center strip of four rectangles on each GPU is probably the fabric for routing data between the execution units. To the left and right of the center are eight identically sized blocks that likely each contain 64 EUs (Execution Units), with eight ALUs (aka, GPU cores) per EU. That gives 512 EUs per chip, and 1024 EUs for the entire package, with potentially 8196 “cores” if we’re trying to compare things with AMD and Nvidia GPUs.
The remaining six rectangles on the left and right sides are likely for memory and other interfaces to the HBM, Rambo Cache, and Compute tiles — or maybe just memory interfaces. Six memory controllers suggest a potential 6144-bit interface. That’s the same overall bus width as Nvidia’s A100, though Nvidia allows for one disabled interface and HBM2 chip per package. There are two smaller rectangles near where the two dies connect.
Even though we can’t say for certain what each of the blocks is doing, it’s clear that Intel has packed a lot of compute power into a single package. Previously, Raja showed off this package shot of Xe HP with a AA battery for scale. Whether that’s the same package we see in today’s die shot isn’t certain, but it seems likely. What any of this means for the consumer-focused Xe HPG, aka DG2, is anyone’s guess.
Intel’s Xe Graphics has been out for a while now, in the form of 11th Gen Tiger Lake laptops, but the discrete variant (Iris Xe Max) has only been in a few notebooks. Now, Intel is finally releasing its Iris Xe for desktops, but they’re not what you would expect, nor can you just go to the shop and buy them.
The GPU in question is the renowned DG1, similar to what we found in the Tiger Lake laptop we tested last year. Except, for the discrete graphics cards for desktops, Intel has seemingly cut the GPU down to 80 Execution Units for 640 cores, and it’s wired to 4 GB of memory. It’s not clear what kind of memory the GPU is wired to (Iris Xe Max used LPDDR4), but it does have its own dedicated pool, unlike the Xe Graphics integrated into Tiger Lake CPUs.
With this design handed over to Asus and Colorful, the following GPUs were conjured:
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Intel)
Asus’s flavor of the DG1 comes passively cooled, and Colorful’s card comes with a cheap-looking dual-fan cooler. Neither of the cards have PCIe power connectors, so it’s clear these are low-power chips. We haven’t found exact TDPs yet, but with cooling solutions like these and a cut down chip design in the desktop parts, expect a sub-30W TDP. The cards both have three display outputs: DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort.
The chips are manufactured on Intel’s 10nm SuperFIN fabrication process, and performance is supposed to be pretty decent at 1080p. Our tests on the mobile platform confirmed this, and chances are that the desktop parts run at higher clock speeds to make up for the deficit in EUs — but exact details aren’t available and neither Asus nor Colorful have working product pages yet.
(Image credit: Intel)
OEM Only — How Bad Is It Really?
However, as much as everyone has been jumping at the thought of Intel joining the discrete high-end GPU market for gamers, that isn’t happening yet. That’s no surprise given what we know about Xe Graphics, as the high-end variants are mostly aimed at HPC and data centers and have not yet launched.
At this level, the DG1 level, Intel is only selling the GPUs directly to system integrators to put in prebuilt desktops — think parties such as Dell and HP. That might seem like a bummer, but let’s be honest: If you’re a gamer, would you really be jumping at the performance offered by the DG1 GPU? Probably not, so we doubt the DIY space will miss the DG1. We’ll keep our fingers crossed for the HPG (High Performance Gaming) Xe solutions in the future.
As a result of this OEM-only strategy, we also don’t know what pricing will look like. Availability is slated for Q1, and this looks like a half-hearted move by Intel at best. Iris Xe Max hasn’t been particularly impressive, and unless Intel has some ace up its sleeve, the desktop DG1 will be pretty anemic compared to competing solutions from AMD and Nvidia.
Then again, even budget graphics cards are currently sold out or selling at inflated prices. Nvidia’s GTX 1050 Ti from over four years back starts at around $170, and the newer GTX 1650 is selling at $300+ on Newegg. Similarly, the Radeon RX 570 that was selling for $120-$130 for over a year now starts at $290. If Intel’s DG1 can keep up with a GTX 1050 for $150, maybe it has a chance?
The Asus TUF Dash F15 is an attractively thin gaming clamshell with an eSports-ready screen. But you can squeeze more frames out of other RTX 30-series laptops.
For
Decent battery life
Fast screen
Successful software-based noise cancelling
Easy upgrades
Against
Frame rates could be better
No webcam
Flat keyboard
Gaming laptops are trying to slim down. This growing trend finds vendors promising power comparable to the best gaming laptops, which often require bulky chassis and cooling to support high-end components, in a PC that’s closer in size to a mainstream notebook.
The Asus TUF Dash F15 ($1,100 to start, available as tested on March 8 for $1,450) is a next-gen example. It offers the latest in Nvidia RTX 30-series mobile graphics and is one of the first machines to use an Intel H35-series chip. The Dash F15 is 20% thinner and 10% lighter than Asus’ usual TUF gaming laptop.
But while the Dash F15 can handle high-end titles, its gaming performance overall feels more like a last-gen Super card than the latest and greatest.
Asus TUF Dash F15 Specs
CPU
Intel Core i7-11370H
Graphics
Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 (8GB GDDR6)
Memory
16GB DDR4-3200
Storage
1TB M.2 2230 NVMe PCIe
Display
15.6-inch IPS panel, 1920 x 1080 resolution @, 240 Hz
Networking
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax), RJ45 Ethernet, Bluetooth 5.2
Ports
Thunderbolt 4 (USB Type-C), 3x USB 3.2 Gen1 (Type-A), HDMI 2.0, 3.5mm audio jack
Camera
None
Battery
76 WHr
Power Adapter
200W
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Dimensions (WxDxH)
14.17 x 9.92 x 0.78 inches (360 x 252 x 19.9mm)
Weight
4.41 pounds (2kg)
Price (as configured)
$1,450
Design on the Asus TUF Dash F15
Available in moonlight white or a more subtle eclipse gray, the Dash F15 can be striking or muted. Its trim build won’t grab attention on its own, but if you opt for the bolder white or decide to activate the keyboard’s “bolt blue”-colored backlight, you may make a head or two turn.
It’s not the striking visage that many gaming laptops proudly carry but with the large TUF block typography that may or may not have been inspired by Alienware (Asus hasn’t stated) on the lid accompanying the TUF logo, there’s enough to keep this more mature laptop from being a complete snooze. But if you’re looking for more fun, the aqua backlight sure looks special coming out of white keycaps compared to our review unit’s more traditional black ones.
Image 1 of 6
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 6
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 6
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 6
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 6
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 6
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Dash F15 isn’t the only trim gaming laptop on the block. At 4.41 pounds and 14.17 x 9.92 x 0.78 inches, it’s a little lighter and wider than the Razer Blade 15 Advanced Model (4.7 pounds, 14 x 9.3 x 0.7 inches). The Acer Predator Triton 300 is also of a similar build (4.4 pounds, 14.3 x 10 x 0.7 inches), but the Alienware m15 R4, which also holds an RTX 3070 graphics card, is heavier than the Dash F15 (5.25 pounds).
When you open the Dash F15, you’re greeted by a more gamer-friendly font and a darker deck. The deck loves to attract fingerprints and is side-flanked with diagonal line carvings that complement the vents north of the keyboard. Liberties were also taken with the shape of the power button. White WASD keys also add to the gamer aesthetic but can look kind of cheap, as you can see the keys’ cross-armed-like white retainers, especially if you turn the blue backlight on.
You get some offset media controls, including a mute button, which is particularly handy as we do more conference calls from home offices. Less welcome is the button for launching Asus’ Armoury Crate software. I’d much rather have the volume mute button here, alongside the other volume buttons (it’s on the FN row instead). There are also no play or pause functions on the keyboard.
Thankfully, the Dash F15 doesn’t sacrifice ports in its quest for sleek. The left side hosts the port for charging the laptop, along with an Ethernet jack, HDMI 2.0, USB 3.2 Gen 1 (Type-A) and even Thunderbolt 4 (USB Type-C). The right side carries two more USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A ports. All the ports are closer to the laptop’s lip, and the charger is shaped like a right angle, so it can be easy for attached cables to get in the way of one another or you.
The Dash F15 isn’t the only trim gaming laptop on the block. At 4.41 pounds and 14.17 x 9.92 x 0.78 inches, it’s a little lighter and wider than the Razer Blade 15 Advanced Model (4.7 pounds, 14 x 9.3 x 0.7 inches). The Acer Predator Triton 300 is also of a similar build (4.4 pounds, 14.3 x 10 x 0.7 inches), but the Alienware m15 R4, which also holds an RTX 3070 graphics card, is heavier than the Dash F15 (5.25 pounds).
Accompanying the travel-friendly form and backing the TUF moniker is military-grade MIL-STD-810H certification for durability. The machine was tested for drops, extreme temperatures, humidity and vibration. Its plastic deck feels a little more solid than the average laptop, especially a budget one, but there’s a little bit of give when pressing the function row buttons. The lid is thin and also has a small amount of flex. The laptop doesn’t open all the way flat, which was a rare nuisance.
Gaming and Graphics on the Asus TUF Dash F15
The Dash F15 we reviewed uses an RTX 3070 (we confirmed that it’s a Max-Q design; however, Asus isn’t using the Max-Q label anymore) mobile graphics card, a member of Nvidia’s newest lineup. With Nvidia’s Dynamic Boost 2.0 AI feature, Asus says the card can clock to over 1,390 MHz (Nvidia specs the card to run from 1,290-1,620 MHz with boost). This is combined with Intel’s latest H35 series processor, a 35W, 4-core/8-thread part based on 11th Gen “Tiger Lake,” rather than the 45W parts we often see in gaming notebooks.
The machine handled Control well on high settings with ray tracing off. The game typically showed frame frame rates in the high 60s to low 70s, going as low as 57 frames per second (fps) and as high as 75 fps. With ray tracing set to high, the average frame rate dropped to the mid to upper 40s. However, it was sometimes down to 33 fps and managed as much as 53 fps.
There’s an obvious hit to frame rate, but ray tracing does provide a noticeable change in graphics in Control, since it uses ray tracing in five ways (on reflections, transparent reflections, diffuse lighting, contact shadows and debris). With ray tracing on, an office wall inside the Oldest House looked very high-end, with a shiny mirrored finish. I could see Jesse’s reflection, as well as that of the light fixture behind her. The wall’s gold paneling reflected a large staircase. But with ray tracing off, I could no longer see the light fixture or my reflection. The wall looked less like a pricey, executive border and instead had a large rectangular area that just looked whiter. The paneling was so washed out it barely looked gold and also lacked reflections.
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 Dash F15 and Alienware both rock the midrange card in Nvidia’s latest mobile GPU lineup; however, the pricier Alienware was able to push out much more impressive frame rates with its RTX 3070 in the Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmark (1920 x 1080 resolution, highest settings). Even the Razer and Acer laptops, which use a last-gen RTX 2080 Super Max-Q and RTX 2070 Super Max-Q, respectively, did better than the Asus, though those are also paired with 10th Gen 45W Intel CPUs.
Our review focus ran the Grand Theft Auto V benchmark (very high) at an average of 87 fps, tying with the Razer and beating the acer (77 fps). But at 108 fps, the Alienware is starkly on top.
The Dash F15 fell to last place when it came to Far Cry New Dawn (ultra), with a 74 fps average. That’s 17 fps slower than the fastest machine in this benchmark, the Alienware. The two last-gen graphics systems were in the mid-80s.
In Red Dead Redemption 2 (medium), the TUF Dash F15 landed a solid second place finish with a 61 fps average. The Alienware beat it by just 8 fps.
The Dash F15 continued to outshine the Razer and Acer laptops on the Borderlands 3 benchmark (badass). The Razer was just 2 fps behind though, and the Alienware, again, took the crown, this time by a notable 16 fps.
To measure ray tracing prowess, we also ran the 3DMark Port Royal benchmark. The Alienware got the highest score (6,411), followed by the Razer (5,048). As a next-gen RTX card, it’s a little disappointing for the Asus to rank third (4,982), albeit a close third. The Acer took last place (3,989).
As a stress test, we ran the Metro Exodus1080p RTX benchmark on a loop 15 times, simulating 30 minutes of gameplay. During this time, the game’s frame rate was very consistent and averaged 51 fps. The RTX 3070 ran at an average clock speed of 1,238.64 MHz and average temperature of 70.8 degrees Celsius (159.44 degrees Fahrenheit). Meanwhile, the CPU averaged 3.66 GHz and 72.19 degrees Celsius (161.94 degrees Fahrenheit).
Productivity Performance on the Asus TUF Dash F15
The Dash F15 stands out as one of the first machines to arrive with an Intel H35-series CPU. Announced in January, these chips were designed specifically for ultraportable laptops and can operate at a TDP between 28W and 35W. Our Dash F15 configuration opts for an Intel Core i7-11370H. It runs at up to 35W, has four CPU cores, eight threads and a clock speed of up to 5.0 GHz. Our review laptop combines that with a 1TB M.2 2230 NVMe PCIe SSD and 16GB of DDR4-3200 RAM.
That proved ample for 21 Google Chrome tabs, with one streaming a TV show, Spotify and the Epic Games launcher. The 21st tab caused the fans to kick up for a second, but not so powerfully that the sound overpowered the audio. I could quickly toggle through tabs and programs without delay or interruption to my show. Even tracking through the show was easy, with just a 1-3 second delay.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
In Geekbench 5.0, the Dash F15 bested the Alienware (same specs as our review focus but with an octa-core i7-10870H), Acer (six-core i7-10750H / 16GB DDR4-2933 / 512GB PCIe NVMe SSD) and Razer (eight-core i7-10875H / 16GB DDR4-2933 / 1TB PCIe NVMe SSD) by a few hundred points. When it came to multi-core productivity, the Dash F15 naturally couldn’t compete with its beefier rivals here. All the competing machines’ CPUs have higher core counts than that of the Dash F15. They also all use older 10th Gen chips, but they’re configured at a higher 45W TDP. If you’re running heavily threaded tasks or games, you can get better performance out of the competitors here.
The Dash F15 fared better against the competition in our file transfer test, moving 25GB of files at a speed of 1,052.03 Mbps. Only the Alienware (1,147 Mbps) was faster. The Razer meanwhile, was at a crawl compared to the other machines here.
In our Handbrake test, each system is tasked with transcoding a video from 4K resolution down to 1080p. The TUF Dash F15 accomplished this in 10 minutes and 41 seconds. That’s 3:34 slower than the winner here, which is, again, the Alienware. The Triton 300 came in third place, completing the task 1:30 faster than the Dash F15.
Display on the Asus TUF Dash F15
Asus opted for a 15.6-inch IPS panel for the Dash F15 and even went the extra mile to include Nvidia G-Sync, a high 240 Hz refresh rate and 3ms response time.
A speedy screen like that has obvious benefits to gaming, especially if you’re playing an eSports title, where it’s easier for your graphics card to near 240 fps. Keep in mind that more graphics-intensive games will be harder to hit high frame rates on.
IPS is known for good color reproduction, and the shades, including the hints of brown cabinets in the darkest shadows or the pale robin’s egg blue of cabinets, came through. Smoky effects with rainbow prisms looked smooth and realistic with hints of purple, blue and red striking through. The area I was playing in is quite dark, however, and in my sunny room I did find myself wanting to nudge up the brightness a smidge.
Mission: Impossible – Fallout didn’t lose its luster on the Dash F15. Subtle shades, like pink in a light purple sky, were apparent, and reds were especially strong. The movie was bright enough head on, but from a side view, I could see reflections on about 80% of the screen.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The TUF Dash F15 is a bit shy of our 300-nit preferred minimum. At 265 nits, it’s in last place here, although the Triton 300 isn’t too far ahead (286 nits). Not surprisingly, the Alienware’s OLED ran away with both the brightness and color tests. The TUF Dash F15’s more equal color competitors are the Razer and Acer machines, and the Asus tied with the Razer with 79% coverage of the DCI-P3 color space, while just barely edging out the Acer.
Keyboard and Touchpad on the Asus TUF Dash F15
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The keyboard on the Dash F15 is a mixed bag. There’s backlighting, but it’s only a teal-ish blue. On the plus side, you can toggle it across three brightness settings or turn it off straight from the keyboard. There’s also an Aura button on the keyboard that toggles through effects, which are all basically flashing blue at different speeds.
The keys have a good amount of travel at 1.7mm, but they’re excruciatingly flat. Typing felt swift and snappy, but it was harder to figure out where my fingers were without any grooves to help them feel grounded in between presses. The travel makes most of the keys comfortable to press, but larger keys, like backspace, enter and shift (interestingly, not the spacebar) felt a little loose and hollow.
On the 10fastfingers.com typing test I averaged 112 words per minute (wpm) with a 93.97% accuracy rate. That’s slightly below my typical 115 wpm average and 98% accuracy rate, and I attribute all that to the flat keys.
Making the keyboard even more home office-friendly, Asus built the keyboard to be quiet and claims that the keys exude less than 30dB of noise. They certainly shouldn’t drum up any complaints. Their gentle clicking is neither silent nor annoying or distracting.
The 4.1 x 2.9-inch touchpad on the Dash F15 is on the smoother side, but doesn’t offer the ice rink-like gliding that some premium competitors offer. Clicks are heavy and clunky, but Windows gestures worked well though.
Audio on the Asus TUF Dash F15
The Dash F15 has two speakers that pump out virtual 7.1 surround sound audio via four cutouts on the laptop’s underside. They’re clear and accurate for gaming, but I wished for a little more volume.
When I played Control, it was sometimes hard to hear voices, such as those chanting in the background or my character’s voice. I also wanted to pump up the volume to better focus on key dialogue providing instructions. Footsteps were also hard to hear, sometimes, especially if the laptop’s fans were whizzing, and the experience wasn’t comparable to the virtual surround sound experience you can get with some of the best gaming headsets. Gunshots, however, sounded crisp and with solid pop.
Again, when I listened to music I want to turn it up about 15% louder for stronger effect. It was loud enough to enjoy but not to blast. Chaka Khan’s “Through the Fire” came through accurately and without sounding tinny. But some of the strength and echo in her voice, along with the instruments, didn’t come through, and there was little bass. More electronic sounds, such as those in ABBA’s “Dancing Queen” suffered more. The song’s sound lost warmth and sounded tinny at times. Playing around with the equalizer and presets in the included Realtek Audio Console software didn’t yield significant improvements.
Upgradeability of the Asus TUF Dash F15
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Dash F15’s back covers prys off easily after unscrewing 14 Phillips head screws. Once inside, there’s space for a second PCIe Gen3 x4 SSD. You can also add up to 32GB of RAM, but you’ll have to get past some thermal tape to get to the SO-DIMM slots, as is the case with the Wi-Fi card.
Battery Life on the Asus TUF Dash F15
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Despite its trim build, the Dash F15 packs decent battery life for a gaming laptop. Our battery test surfs the web, runs OpenGL tests and streams video while connected to Wi-Fi and set to 150 nits brightness. The TUF Dash 15 kept up the workload for 6 minutes and 32 seconds, which is 41 minutes longer than the closest competitor, the Triton 300. The Alienware has been a favorite among our benchmarks, but all that power cost it battery life, and it placed last.
The Dash F15 comes with an AC charger, but you can also charge it at up to 100W via USB-C. Sadly, our review unit wasn’t bundled with a USB-C laptop charger. Still, it’s a nice feature to have. If you’re ever in a pickle, it keeps getting more likely that you or someone around you has something that uses a USB-C charger.
Heat on the Asus TUF Dash F15
As you might expect with a slender laptop, this isn’t the coolest machine around, but the Dash F15 still manages to keep warm temperatures relatively at bay. Although, it gets harder not to sweat when you get gaming. When I fired up Control, my right hand controlling my mouse immediately felt warm air blowing out of the side of the laptop, which remained as long as I was playing.
After 15 minutes of watching YouTube, the Dash F15’s hottest point was the center of the underside, where it measured 93 degrees Fahrenheit (33.9 degrees Celsius). The spot between the G and H keys was 90.5 degrees Fahrenheit (32.5 degrees Celsius), while the touchpad was 78 degrees Fahrenheit (25.6 degrees Celsius).
After 15 minutes of gaming, the touchpad was still a cool 78 degrees Fahrenheit, but the spot between the G and H keys jumped up to 101.5 degrees Fahrenheit (38.6 degrees Celsius), and the hottest point reached 117.5 degrees Fahrenheit (47.5 degrees Celsius. For comparison, the Alienware hit 108.7 degrees after YouTubing and 111.4 degrees when gaming.
To keep a 0.78-inch machine cool, Asus implemented its ROG Intelligent Cooling hardware-software solution. The Dash F15 uses 5 copper heat pipes (covering the CPU, GPU, VRAM and VRM) and two 83-blade, liquid crystal polymer fans to pull heat away from the CPU, GPU, VRAM and VRM and disperse it through the machine’s four heatsinks and fan outlets. There’s venting by the WASD keys to let the fan beneath generate airflow. Additionally, Asus upgraded the self-cleaning capabilities over last year’s TUF lineup with 5% more airflow space.
On the software side of the cooling solution, the TUF Dash F15 uses Nvidia’s Dynamic Boost 2.0, which switches power to the CPU or GPU, depending on what needs the most push. There’s also Armoury Crate, which, once downloaded, lets you choose among performance modes, including a “Silent” one that promises a max sound level of 35dB.
Webcam on the Asus TUF Dash F15
There’s no webcam integrated in the slim bezel on the Dash F15’s display. There’s no making up for that, especially with more people taking so many video calls these days, but Asus tries by offering software-based artificial intelligence (AI) to block out background noise on both ends of a call.
That’s right, Asus claims its tech can remove the sound of your noisy keyboard while also silencing your friend’s dog annoyingly barking in the background. Once you activate AI noise cancelling in the Armoury Crate software and switch to the appropriate speaker and mic in your chatting platform, it provides a helpful service.
In a video call with a friend, I was able to silence his TV and banging in the background. And on my end, he could “barely” hear me tapping my pen right next to my laptop on my desk.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Asus claims its software can reduce noise by 95% and eradicate 500 million “types of background noise.” The technology purposely uses the laptop’s CPU instead of its graphics card, so as to not interfere with gaming performance. You can also tweak its settings in Armoury Crate, and Asus provides recommended settings based on the scenario.
Software and Warranty on the Asus TUF Dash F15
Asus kept the Dash F15’s bloatware light. Our review unit came with RealTek Audio Console, McAfee Personal Security, Skype, Your Phone, Xbox Game Bar and Xbox Console Companion, courtesy of Windows 10, but not much else — not even your usual smatterings of Candy Crush Sagas.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Asus does include Armoury Crate, but it’s worth keeping for the AI noise cancelling and, partially, because two of the keyboard’s buttons are useless without it. If you do download the app, you’ll also get access to other perks, the most helpful being the ability to select and tweak different cooling profiles and display presets.
Asus backs the TUF Dash F15 with a 1-year warranty.
Asus TUF Dash F15 Configurations
We tested the middle configuration of the Dash F15 (SKU FX516PR-211.TM15). Available on March 8 for $1,450, it includes an Intel Core i7-11370H CPU, RTX 3070 graphics card, 16GB of DDR4 RAM, a 1TB PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD and a 240 Hz display.
The cheapest configuration (SKU FX516PM-211.TF15) will be available on February 15 for $1,100. It comes with the same CPU and RAM as our review focus but drops down to an RTX 3060 GPU, a less roomy 512GB SSD and a slower 144 Hz refresh rate.
The most expensive version of the Dash F15 is $1,700 and matches our review configuration, except it bumps up to an Intel Core i7-11375H and RTX 3070.
Bottom Line
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Asus TUF Dash F15 continues the trend of slim gaming laptops and does it justice, but there are inherent limitations to a gaming laptop focused on staying thin.
For one, frame rates might not match what you expect from Nvidia’s next-gen RTX 30-series on thicker machines. The Dash F15 fell behind the Alienware m15 R4 using the same GPU in our gaming benchmarks, and overall, its gaming performance was more similar to an RTX 20-Series Super card. .
At $1,450, our configuration of the Dash F15 seems fairly priced . It performed similarly to the Acer Predator Triton 300, which was $1,600 when it came out with a six-core Intel Core i7-10750H and RTX 2080 Super Max-Q. The aforementioned Alienware, meanwhile, is $2,499 as tested. So the Dash F15 offers good gaming performance for the price; it’s just not much of an upgrade over last-gen machines.
In terms of the new Intel H35-series chip, the Dash F15 excelled with lightly threaded workloads, even compared to pricey rivals. But for workloads requiring more cores, the Dash F15’s 11th Gen quad-core chip can’t keep up with beefier 10th Gen CPUs.
The performance conundrum of a slim gaming laptop is something Asus hasn’t fully solved with the Dash F15. But if you’re after a lightweight laptop with the premium screen and components that can handle high-end gaming with good frame rates for the price, the Dash F15 may be for you.
AMD whipped the covers off of its Ryzen 5000 ‘Cezanne’ mobile chips at CES 2021, but today marks the official launch and AMD has unveiled the deep-dive details of the SoC that brings the Zen 3 architecture to the notebook market for the first time. The new chips will power a large range of notebooks, like the Asus ROG Flow X13 that we reviewed today, and finally bring Ryzen to the highest-end gaming notebooks to compete with Intel’s Tiger Lake chips.
On the surface, the Ryzen 5000 chips look like an iterative update to existing Ryzen 4000 Renoir processors, but there’s a surprising amount of ingenuity under the hood. AMD’s Ryzen 5000 Mobile chips bring the 7nm process paired with Zen 3’s 19% IPC increase to notebooks for the first time, largely by replacing the Zen 2 CPU cores with faster Zen 3 cores while leveraging much of the Ryzen 4000 design (like the 7nm Vega graphics cores and existing I/O accommodations) to minimize time to market.
And time is of the essence. For now, Intel will fend off the Ryzen 5000 chips with its Tiger Lake lineup that’s currently capped at four cores and eight threads with its 35W H35 series chips. Intel says its long-awaited eight-core 45W H-series chips are still in development, with headline specs including a 5.0 GHz boost on multiple CPU cores, but the company’s first eight-core 10nm processors won’t come to market until later this quarter.
Meanwhile, AMD is shipping Ryzen 5000 and has wrung out extra performance through clever modifications to its existing Ryzen 4000 SoC design, which we’ll cover below, culminating in a 23% overall improvement in single-threaded work and a 17% increase in multi-threaded performance for the 5000 series.
AMD says the improvements open up new levels of performance and set a new standard for battery life in x86 notebooks, with up to a 20-hour increase in standby life and an additional two hours during general productivity work, all while remaining the only 8-core x86 chips for ultrathin laptops.
The Ryzen 5000 Mobile series looks promising. Provided that AMD can provide sufficient quantities, they could mark yet another escalation in the increasingly-competitive notebook market. Let’s take a closer look.
AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Mobile Processors 35W – 45W+ H-Series
Cores / Threads
Base / Boost
TDP
GPU CU / Boost
Cache
Ryzen 9 5980HX
8 / 16
3.3 / 4.8
45W+
8 / 2.1 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 9 5980HS
8 / 16
3.0 / 4.8
35W
8 / 2.1 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 9 5900HX
8 / 16
3.3 / 4.6
45W+
8 / 2.1 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 9 5900HS
8 / 16
3.0 / 4.6
35W
8 / 2.1 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 9 4900H
8 / 16
3.3 / 4.3
45W
8 / 1.75 GHz
12MB
Ryzen 9 4900HS
8 / 16
3.0 / 4.3
35W
8 / 1.75 GHz
12MB
Ryzen 7 5800H
8 / 16
3.2 / 4.4
45W
8 / 2.0 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 7 4800H
8 / 16
2.9 / 4.2
45W
7 / 1.6 GHz
12MB
Ryzen 7 5800HS
8 / 16
2.8 / 4.4
35W
8 / 2.0 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 7 4800HS
8 / 16
2.9 / 4.2
35W
7 / 1.6 GHz
12MB
Ryzen 5 5600H
6 / 12
3.3 / 4.2
45W
7 / 1.8 GHz
19MB
Ryzen 5 4600H
6 / 12
3.0 / 4.0
45W
6 / 1.5 GHz
11MB
Ryzen 5 5600HS
6 / 12
3.0 / 4.2
35W
7 / 1.8 GHz
19MB
Ryzen 5 4600HS
6 / 12
3.0 / 4.0
35W
6 / 1.5 GHz
11MB
The 13 new processors span from low-power 15W chips up to two new overclockable 45W+ HX-series models designed to bring desktop PC-like gaming performance to notebooks. The Ryzen 5000 mobile processors all come with threading enabled, the 7nm Vega graphics engine with higher graphics boost clocks than the prior-gen models, support CPPC (Collaborative Power and Performance Control) technology, which we’ll dive into shortly, and have higher CPU boost clocks than the previous-gen.
As before, the H-series models are designed for notebooks that will use discrete graphics. The two 45W+ eight-core HX models carve out a new high-performance niche by bringing CPU, memory, and fabric overclocking to AMD-powered notebooks for the first time, but overclocking headroom will largely be dictated by the thermal and power characteristics of each notebook. Naturally, bulkier notebooks with more robust cooling and power delivery will unlock better overclockability.
The two H models slot in with eight- and six-core variants and a 45W TDP rating, with the former having eight CUs that boost to 2.0 GHz, while the latter has seven CUs that stretch up to 1.8 GHz.
AMD also expanded its HS series with four chips with boost clocks that reach up to 4.8 GHz within the 35W TDP envelope. AMD segments the HS stack with three eight-core models with varying base and boost clocks, but these models have lower base clocks than the H-series models to accommodate the 35W TDP envelope. AMD also has a lone six-core twelve-thread model to round out the bottom of the H-Series stack. AMD also segments the HS models with either seven or eight Vega CUs, with peak boost clocks weighing in at 2.1 GHz.
AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Mobile Processors 15W U-Series
Cores / Threads
Base / Boost
GPU CU / Boost
Cache
Ryzen 7 5800U – Zen 3
8 / 16
1.9 / 4.4
8 / 2.0 GHz
20MB
Ryzen 7 4800U
8 / 16
1.8 / 4.1
8 / 1.75 GHz
8MB
Ryzen 7 5700U – Zen 2
8 / 16
1.8 / 4.3
8 / 1.9 GHz
12MB
Ryzen 7 4700U
8 / 16
2.0 / 4.1
7 / 1.6 GHz
8MB
Ryzen 5 5600U – Zen 3
6 / 12
2.3 / 4.2
7 / 1.8 GHz
19MB
Ryzen 5 4600U
6 / 12
2.1 / 4.0
6 / 1.5 GHz
8MB
Ryzen 5 5500U – Zen 2
6 / 12
2.1 / 4.0
7 / 1.8 GHz
11MB
Ryzen 5 4500U
6 / 6
2.3 / 4.0
6 / 1.5 GHz
8MB
Ryzen 3 5400U – Zen 3
4 / 8
2.6 / 4.0
6 / 1.6 GHz
10MB
Ryzen 3 4300U
4 / 4
2.7 / 3.7
5 / 1.4 GHz
4MB
Ryzen 3 5300U – Zen 2
4 / 8
2.6 / 3.8
6 / 1.5 GHz
6MB
The 15W U-Series models slot in for thin and light devices and will often lean on the integrated graphics units. AMD recently chose to unify its Ryzen Mobile branding under the same Ryzen 5000 umbrella as its desktop chips to clear up the confusion with the Ryzen 4000 series processors that came with an older architecture than desktop Ryzen 3000 models.
However, AMD also sprinkled in three Zen 2 ‘Lucienne’ chips in the Ryzen 5000 Mobile stack, muddying the waters. AMD says this approach meets specific pricing criteria and customer (OEM) demand on the lower end of its product stack. These Zen 2-powered Ryzen 3, 5, and 7 models slot into the lowest-end 15W U-series category.
The Zen 2 variants come with the same design as their predecessors, but again, the targeted enhancements to the SoC (all of the same modifications listed below apply) and increased clock rates result in higher performance.
The Ryzen 7, 5, and 3 families also include one Zen 3 model apiece with either eight cores and 16 threads, or four cores and eight threads. Unlike the previous-gen Ryzen 4000 chips, all of the 15W models come threading enabled.
AMD Ryzen 5000 Mobile Architecture Deep Dive – Design Goals
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD’s performance claims for the Ryzen 5000 chips are quite impressive, with a 23% generational improvement in single-threaded performance being the highlight feature. The increased single-threaded performance over the Zen 2-powered Ryzen 4000 chips stems from the 19% IPC improvement borne of the Zen 3 microarchitecture and more fine-grained SoC-level optimizations that optimize power delivery, among other factors. AMD also claims two additional hours of battery life and a 108% advantage in multi-threaded work over Intel’s 11th-gen mobile processors.
AMD’s design goals focused on three key areas: Performance (particularly in IPC and per-core performance), latency improvements that come via the unified L3 cache and eight-core CCX, and improved power efficiency.
Zen 3 Unification
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
The Ryzen 5000 Mobile chips come with all the hallmarks of the Zen 3 microarchitecture, which you can read more about here. Like the desktop chips, AMD increased the L3 cache to 16MB over the prior gen’s 8MB and unified the eight cores and cache into one contiguous cluster inside the CCX (Core Complex). In contrast, Zen 2 had two four-core clusters, each with 4MB of cache.
This new arrangement improves both core-to-cache and core-to-core latency. For highly-threaded applications, this new design imparts a 2X cache increase, and lightly-threaded workloads now have access to a full 16MB of cache, which is equivalent to a 4X increase in directly-accessible cache.
Ryzen 5000’s monolithic die, meaning it is one large die instead of the multi-die arrangements on desktop chips, allows for tighter control of power efficiency. The company also improved performance-per-watt (power efficiency) by targeting the highest-end of the frequency/voltage curve it could maintain while controlling thermal density. That’s a key consideration for thin-and-light devices with limited cooling capability. By sustaining the highest clocks possible while the chip is still in the thermal and power efficiency sweet spot, the company increased single-threaded performance beyond Zen 3’s 19% IPC uplift to a 23% improvement in per-core performance.
The Ryzen 5000 Mobile Die
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
In many respects, AMD simply replaced the Zen 2 cores with Zen 3 cores, leaving the rest of the design untouched. AMD’s re-use scheme allowed the company to accelerate time to market; AMD introduced the mobile variants a mere 90 days after the desktop models, which is the fastest transition of a new architecture to mobile in the company’s history (it typically takes a year).
The company’s forward-thinking modular design eased the process: AMD planned for this eventuality when it designed the Ryzen 4000 SoC. AMD also preserved the same pinout (BGA mounting scheme) for the Ryzen 5000 processors, meaning they are backward compatible with existing designs. This also allows OEMs to use the same motherboards and componentry for both existing and future products, speeds the design of new laptops, and allows OEMs to leverage existing supply chains. However, while these design elements largely remain the same, AMD fine-tuned the various elements to extract more performance, which we’ll dive into below.
Although it doesn’t equate directly to the physical layout on the die, the topology in the second slide shows us the design’s basic outlay. Here we can see the eight threaded cores clustered around the central 16MB slice of L3 cache, two DDR4-3200 / LPDDR4x-4266 controllers, and the 7nm Vega GPU with 1MB of L2 cache and eight CUs.
The SoC also has a host of other fixed-function acceleration blocks for multimedia, the System Management Unit (SMU) for power delivery control, Fusion Controller Hub (FCH) for external sensors, audio engine, Platform Security Processor (which comes into play in the Pro models), and the usual external interfaces, like NVMe and three flavors of USB (Type-C, 3.1, 2.0).
As before, the chips have 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0 connectivity, meaning Cezanne will not have PCIe 4.0 support. AMD allocates eight lanes to the graphics, while the remaining eight lanes are split between two NVMe interfaces for storage.
The Ryzen 5000 mobile die spreads 10.7 billion 7nm TSMC transistors across 180mm2 of silicon, with the core complexes, L3 cache, and GPU in the center of the die, while the I/O componentry lines the periphery. This is slightly larger (~15%) than Renoir’s 156mm2 die and comes with 900,000 more transistors (the larger caches contribute to the higher transistor count).
Die Size
Transistor Count
Transistor Density
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Cezanne
180mm2
10.7 billion
59.44 MTr/mm2
Ryzen 4000 Mobile Renoir
156mm2
9.8 billion
62.82 MTr/mm2
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Memory Controller Enhancements
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD’s engineers turned their eye to optimizing the memory PHY to reduce the overall SoC power draw. With Ryzen 4000, the PHY remained fully ‘on’ if the SoC wasn’t in a standby power state, consuming a significant amount of power draw. Ryzen 5000 introduces a deep power state that the SMU engages when the PHY is in a lower-activity state (but not idle). This shifts the digital portion of the PHY into a lower power state, bypassing it to reduce supply voltage. This technique engages a new low-dropout (LDO) power regulator and turns off the primary on-chip voltage regulator for the memory PHY during low usage. This approach reduces power consumption from the PHY and the power delivery network as well.
Of course, minimizing latency when the controller shifts back to its full-performance state is paramount. AMD leverages the data fabric’s hardware-assisted fast entry/exit mechanisms to shift into different power states, thus lowering latency.
Each memory controller supports a single 64b memory channel or dual 32b virtual channels. Each controller supports DDR4-3200 in single-channel (1DPC SR/DR) or two channels of LPDDR4x-4266.
Quad-channel LPDDR4x provides 33% more theoretical bandwidth than DDR4-3200 and has twice the density of standard DDR4, thus improving maximum capacity to 32GB of memory with a two-channel die.
Vega Rides Again
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
As before, the Vega graphics unit comes with a maximum of 8 compute units (CU) and 1MB of L2 cache, but AMD increased the peak frequency by 20% (up to 2.1 GHz).
AMD fine-tuned the power management mechanisms, like the on-chip voltage regulator, to improve sustained performance. AMD also reduced Vmin (the minimum voltage required for operation) to improve power efficiency (performance-per-watt). These improvements enable higher-frequency operation in tandem with improved frequency-per-watt throughout the entire voltage/frequency range. That frees up additional power that’s used to sustain higher frequencies in either the CPU or GPU.
AMD’s new intelligent graphics Dynamic Energy Management (DEM) functionality steps in to detect which workloads are impacted heavily by graphics frequency, allowing the GPU to operate at lower frequencies when increasing the frequency wouldn’t result in tangible performance gains (for example, when the workload is primarily memory bound).
Ryzen 5000 uses the latest revision of the 7nm process, which has less leakage. It also marks the debut of per-core CPU voltage regulation to the Ryzen Mobile lineup, which reduces overall power consumption during gaming workloads. The saved power savings from these two factors can be directed to the GPU to boost gaming performance.
AMD also optimized its graphics drivers for enhanced memory management and tweaked anti-aliasing and other functions, with peak performance weighing in at 2.15 TFLOPS (FP32) and 4.30 TFLOPS (FP16). AMD used benchmark results from Timespy, a CPU intensive workload, to quantify the performance improvement, noting a 171% increase over the first-gen Ryzen processors. Notably, the Ryzen 5000 Vega iGPU is 15% faster than Ryzen 4000.
AMD carries all the security features present in the 4000 series to the 5000 series, with the addition of Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) that eliminates control flow attacks that hijack legitimate applications to run malicious code. As before, the chips also have other security features that serve as the bedrock of the Pro Security suite for Ryzen Pro processors.
Ryzen 5000 Mobile, Boosting Boosts
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD’s addition of its Collaborative Power Performance and Control (CPPC) interface was truly a watershed breakthrough for its Ryzen 3000 desktop chips. This tech tells the operating system which cores are the fastest, and the Windows scheduler then targets lightly-threaded workloads at those cores. This allows AMD to bin its chips into higher speed grades based on the fastest available cores on the chip, instead of the older technique of binning the chip based on the lowest common denominator (slowest core).
This technique discards the old paradigm of only having three power states, which provides more granular power control to improve both power efficiency (battery life) and performance. The CPPC interface also allows the operating system to dictate power state transitions on a per-core basis via a broader range of voltage and frequency settings. Now the processor can assign any voltage or frequency within its operating range on the fly. Additionally, this technique reduces transition latency from ~30ms when it is controlled by firmware down to 1-2 ms, which improves performance in bursty workloads and saves power.
AMD also added per-core power and frequency management to provide another layer of granularity. In the past, the CPU cores were tied to the same voltage plane as the GPU, resulting in a 1:1 relationship between CPU vCore and GPU Vgfx, regardless of load on either unit.
The illustration on the right of the second slide illustrates the impact – Ryzen 4000’s cores all ran at the same voltage regardless of voltage, matching that of the graphics unit, while Ryzen 5000 adjusts on a per-core basis regardless of GPU voltage.
During multi-threaded heterogeneous workloads, the chip can match frequency and voltage on all the cores running that specific workload, thus ensuring consistent operation. AMD’s on-chip power regulation also supports software quality of service (QoS) hooks that allow the operating system to more effectively identify higher- and lower-priority workloads, which then is used to dictate voltage and frequency of the affected cores to maximize power efficiency.
As you can see in the last slide, AMD says that the culmination of these technologies delivers significant reductions in SoC power draw, with a head-to-head comparison between the Ryzen 7 5800U and 4800U showing impressive reductions in a few different scenarios. That includes a 26% reduction in standby mode, an impressive 47% reduction at idle, a 33% reduction in video playback, and an 18% reduction when the chip is under load in the MobileMark 2018 benchmark.
Ryzen 5000 Mobile Battery Life
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD also made a host of other refinements at the system level to help reduce power draw, including working with audio codec vendors to increase the occurrence and duration of low-power/idle residency states for the audio codec. Likewise, AMD worked with hardware vendors for certain components, like DC-to-DC regulators and embedded controllers, to enable support for new ‘hints’ that trigger lower-power states.
AMD says it has increased standby state time by 20 hours, idle battery life by 3.9 hours, video playback by 1.1 hours, and MobileMark by 2 hours. The company also claims that the Ryzen 9 5900HX is 19% faster in single-threaded workloads than Intel’s flagship 10980HK.
AMD Ryzen 5000 Mobile Performance Benchmarks
AMD provided a host of performance benchmarks in three key areas: Mobile gaming, content creation, and ultrathin performance. As with all vendor-provided benchmarks, you should take these results with a grain of salt. We’re sharing the full slide deck for each category, but without commentary – take the results as you will. We also include the endnotes that contain the test configurations.
Today marks the launch of the chips, so there should be plenty of third-party reviews for another take on performance, like our Asus ROG Flow X13 review.
AMD Ryzen 5000 Mobile Cezanne Gaming Benchmarks
Image 1 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 3 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 4 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 5 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 6 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 7 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 8 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 9 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 10 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 11 of 11
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD Ryzen 5000 Mobile Content Creation Benchmarks
Image 1 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 3 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 4 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 5 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 6 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 7 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 8 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 9 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 10 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 11 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 12 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 13 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 14 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 15 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 16 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 17 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 18 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 19 of 19
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD Ryzen 5000 Mobile Ultrathin Benchmarks
Image 1 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 3 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 4 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 5 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 6 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 7 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 8 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 9 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 10 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 11 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 12 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 13 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 14 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 15 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 16 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 17 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 18 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 19 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 20 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 21 of 21
(Image credit: AMD)
Thoughts
Ryzen 5000 Mobile brings a new level of competition to the laptop market through a more refined 7nm process, the Zen 3 architecture, and good old fashioned engineering. Some will see AMD’s decision to re-use key parts of the design, like the Vega graphics unit and PCIe 3.0 controllers, as a liability. Still, AMD managed to wring out enough extra performance and longer battery life to offset most of the downsides.
AMD’s re-use tactic allowed it to speed the chips to market and also simplify the design process for its OEM partners. That’s important in the face of a much larger and entrenched competitor like Intel. AMD’s deeper levels of engagement with ecosystem partners are emerging as it gains more market share and thus has access to more resources. And this is a virtuous cycle: AMD has made the types of adjustments and collaborations that OEMs appreciate, which should further deepen its partnerships.
AMD’s Ryzen 4000 series mobile processors have already taken the notebook market by storm, granting the company its biggest slice of the mobile market in history, and the Ryzen 5000 Mobile chips look to continue that momentum. AMD pulled off this feat in record time — the Raven Ridge chips didn’t come to the mobile market for a year after debuting on the desktop, while the Zen 3 transition should take roughly four months.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: AMD)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: AMD)
Speaking of Raven Ridge, those chips came to market in 75 designs, while the next-gen Ryzen 4000 chips landed in 100 devices. AMD expects Ryzen 5000 to power over 150 notebooks by the end of the year, many with the highest-end graphics cards, a distinction that has long eluded the company. As you can see above, the chips will debut in a wide range of devices from leading OEMs.
For now, supply could be AMD’s biggest obstacle. Record demand, coupled with the trade war and conditions associated with the pandemic, has strangled the supply of chips for almost every segment, spanning from automobiles to the CPUs and GPUs craved by enthusiasts, which has lead to price gouging. Hopefully AMD can ensure enough supply to keep OEM pricing within reasonable bounds.
AMD’s partners do have Ryzen 5000 Mobile laptops on the market, but we’ll have to wait and see how long term supply pans out. Given what we’ve seen from the first reviews, it looks like AMD will have plenty of demand for its latest chips.
The first alleged independent benchmark results of AMD’s recently introduced eight-core Ryzen 9 5980HS “Cezanne” laptop processors have been published. AMD’s Zen 3-based chip uses integrated Radeon graphics, and, according to the new numbers, beats its predecessor and Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake in single- and multi-core workloads, as well as 11th Gen intel Tiger Lake in single-core. However, there is a processor that still beats AMD’s Cezanne.
Hardware enthusiast @Tum_Apisak found two Geekbench 5 results from the Asus ROG Flow X13. The gaming notebook runs the eight-core Ryzen 9 5980HS at a 3.30 GHz default clock speed and can boost it all the way to a 4.53 GHz. In one case, AMD’s Cezanne APU hit a 1,532 single-core score and 8,219 multi-core score. In another case, the processor finished with 1,541 single-core points and 8,224 multi-core points.
CPU
Single-Core
Multi-Core
Cores/Threads, uArch
Cache
Clocks
TDP
Link
AMD Ryzen 9 5980HS
1540
8,225
8C/16T, Zen 3
16MB
3.30 ~ 4.53 GHz
35W
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6027200
AMD Ryzen 9 4900H
1230
7,125
8C/16T, Zen 2
8MB
3.30 ~ 4.44 GHz
35~54W
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6028856
Intel Core i9-10885H
1335
7,900
8C/16T, Skylake
16MB
2.40 ~ 5.08 GHz
45W
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6006773
Intel Core i7-1185G7
1550
5,600
4C/8T, Willow Cove
12MB
3.0 ~ 4.80 GHz
28W
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/5644005
Apple M1
1710
7,660
4C Firestorm + 4C Icestorm
12MB + 4MB
3.20 GHz
20~24W
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6038094
Typically, Cezanne looks very good compared to previous-generation AMD and Intel architectures. The most interesting comparison we can make with a Zen 3 APU is with an Intel Willow Cove processor. Since Intel hasn’t launched its eight-core Tiger Lake-H chips yet, quad-core Core i7 1100-series “Tiger Lake-U” processors are the only available CPUs featuring the Willow Cove microarchitecture. These CPUs are not quite meant for gaming machines and, therefore, come inside notebooks with less sophisticated cooling.
Generally, Intel Core i7-1185G7-based machines score 1,350-1450 single-core points on Geekbench 5. A well-cooled example can hit around 1,550 on a single core and about 5,600 on multi-cores.
Therefore, it looks like mobile CPUs featuring AMD’s Zen 3 and Intel’s Willow Cove cores have comparable single-core performance (assuming that both are cooled properly). Naturally, AMD’s eight-core gaming APU naturally beats Intel’s quad-core CPU in workloads leveraging multiple cores.
As far as Geekbench 5 results go, AMD’s Ryzen 9 5980HS looks like a very potent mobile APU with a 35W TDP. Yet, it’s not unbeatable.
Apple’s tiny M1 system-on-chip (SoC) running at 3.20 GHz scored 11% better than the Ryzen 9 5980HS in single-core workloads and 7% worse in multi-core workloads while consuming about 30% less power, assuming that its TDP is up to 24W.
AMD’s eight-core Ryzen 9 4900H “Renoir” APUs, based on the Zen 2 microarchitecture, scores about 1,230 single-core points and around 7,100 multi-core points when running at 3.30 / 4.44 GHz clocks in Geekbench 5. Therefore, the new Cezanne APU is apparently 25% faster than its Renoir predecessor in single-core tasks and about 15% faster in multi-core workloads.
Cezanne’s noticeably higher performance compared to its predecessor can be explained by microarchitectural improvements, as well as a two times larger L2 cache. The Ryzen 94900H is rated for up to a 54W TDP, whereas the new one has a default TDP of 35W.
A comparison of the new numbers for the Ryzen 9 5980HS to Intel’s eight-core Core i9-10885H, Intel’s fastest mobile Comet Lake CPU with a locked multiplier, suggests the Ryzen 9 5980HS is 15% faster in single-core workloads and 4% faster in multi-core tasks.
It should be noted that the Ryzen 9 5980HS numbers haven’t been confirmed, so you should take them with a grain of salt.
Home/Component/CPU/AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX tops the laptop and portable CPU ranking on PassMark
João Silva 57 mins ago CPU, Featured Announcement, Laptop / Mobile
The PassMark CPU Mark ranking for laptop and portable CPUs has a new entry in the number one spot. The Ryzen 9 5900HX is the new number one laptop CPU in the PassMark CPU Mark benchmark rankings.
Announced back at CES 2021, the Ryzen 5000H series will feature two HX models, the Ryzen 9 5900HX and Ryzen 9 5980HX processors. These models are the top of line Ryzen 5000H processors, featuring an 8C/16T core configuration, up to 4.8GHz speeds, 20MB of cache, and a 45W+ TDP.
The Ryzen 9 5900HX, which has been announced to feature in multiple high-end gaming laptops, has a 3.3GHz base clock that boosts up to 4.6GHz. As per the PassMark CPU Mark ranking for laptop and portable CPUs, this processor scored 24039 in the multi-thread benchmark, and 3365 in the single-thread test, beating the second and third placed processors by 20% and 10%. The system used to score these results was a ROG Strix SCAR 17 G733 laptop.
These scores seem promising to the upcoming Ryzen 5000H series. The Ryzen 9 5900HX is not even the flagship CPU of the series it already tops the charts. Once the flagship Ryzen 9 5980HX gets tested, the extra 200MHz in boost clock should allow it to score even higher. Note that no laptop has been announced with the Ryzen 9 5980HX yet, but we expect to see it in the future.
The first laptops equipped with the Ryzen 5000H processors, including the Ryzen 9 5900HX, are slated to launch in February.
KitGuru says: How much higher will the Ryzen 9 5980HX score? Do you think Intel Tiger Lake-H processors will top the ranking once they get released?
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Nvidia confirms changes to Max-Q laptop GPU branding
For previous generations of Nvidia laptop GPUs, the company has differentiated between SKUs with a …
Pat Gelsinger, new CEO of Intel since 15 February, he said he was satisfied with the development stage of the 7 nanometer production process and assured that most of the 2023 products will be produced in-house.
by Manolo De Agostini published 22 January 2021 , at 09: 01 in the Processors channel Intel
The future Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger , who will officially join the company on 15 February succeeding Bob Swan, has begun to outline the strategy of the microchip giant, in particular the important and crucial production sector , as anticipated in recent weeks. On the sidelines of the quarterly report, the new CEO explained that he will illustrate in detail his vision after taking up the position, but nevertheless he anticipated important steps forward in the development of the production process. 7 nanometers , after the problems highlighted last year.
“I had the opportunity to personally review the progress of Intel’s 7-nanometer technology over the previous week. Based on the initial review, I am satisfied with the progress made in terms of health and recovery on the 7 nanometer program. confident that most of our products planned for 2023 will be produced in-house . At the same time, given the breadth of our portfolio, it is likely that we will expand our use of external factories for certain technologies and products. We will provide more details on this aspect and on the roadmap 2023 once I have fully evaluated the analysis that has been done and the best path to follow “.
We will probably have to wait some time for Gelsinger to offer us an overview and on Intel’s production future, updating us not only on 7 nanometers but also on the most advanced processes on which the company is working with the lights off. The new CEO, however, reveals the intention of wanting to make the most of existing capabilities , both in technological terms that of men: he does not therefore seem, at least at the moment, ready for drastic changes in the modus operandi. Much will depend on the circumstances and if Intel really managed to get the 7-nanometer process back on track, it will all become easier for Gelsinger.
“Looking ahead, the world is becoming more digitally connected, expanding the market ahead of us. Intel is the only semiconductor company in the world that can offer intelligent silicon, platform vision and manufacturing capacity, along with the reach our customers need to power their next innovations, “commented the future CEO.
” There are huge opportunities for Intel , but to be able to grasp them we need to provide the best products and keep up with our customers’ needs. We need to become more agile in a very competitive market. We must work flawlessly and carry out our commitments. We must innovate with passion , audacity and speed. Intel’s culture and values must be healthy and vibrant, making sure we attract and retain the best engineering talent in the world “, Gelsinger added. In the past few hours, in this regard, we have learned how the lead architect of the Nehalem architecture is back in the ranks of Intel. Gelsinger said he was happy with this development and anticipated that there will be changes in leadership roles thanks to the return in the company of leading figures in industry.
Speaking after Gelsinger, Bob Swan explained that in the definition of the 7 nanometers, “the flow contained a particular sequence of steps that contributed to the defect we talked about last June”. The review of the process led to the resolution of defects, but also to the “rationalization and simplification” of the technology to “make sure we can comply with our product roadmap for 2023 “, said the outgoing CEO saying he was confident that Intel will respect the commitments.
“In parallel, as stated by Pat, we will continue to leverage our relationships developed over the years with our partners external production and we believe they can play a greater role in our roadmap given our disaggregated projects “, added Swan, recalling how in the future the US company will increasingly switch to chiplet-based projects (such as AMD) and to new packaging solutions, all elements that can be created individually and subsequently assembled for create a finished product.
Going back to upcoming products, Swan said Intel has an “exciting” range of CPUs for the 2021 and 2022. “Just two weeks ago at CES we introduced beyond 50 processors for a total of more than 500 projects between laptops and desktops coming to market in the 2021 “. And while Tiger Lake and the notebook sector are doing very well, as learned from the quarterly report, as far as datacenters are concerned, Intel is delivering the first Intel Xeon Scalable CPU to 10 nanometers, codenamed Ice Lake , with an increase in volumes expected for the course of this quarter.
Intel then reiterated what it said at CES 2021: the arrival of Alder Lake this year on notebooks and desktop PCs, as well as the new project Sapphire Rapids for the world of data centers. Both products are made with the process “Enhanced SuperFin” nanometers and are already in the hands of some partners: Alder Lake production will go live in the second half of the year , while Sapphire Rapids will have to wait until the last quarter.
Intel closed on 2020 with record turnover of 77, $ 9 billion. The fourth quarter exceeded expectations at a crucial time for the company’s future: in mid-February, CEO Bob Swan will hand over the helm to Pat Gelsinger.
by Manolo De Agostini published 22 January 2021 , at 08: 01 in the Market channel Intel
Bob Swan’s latest quarterly as Intel CEO before handing over the scepter to Pat Gelsinger closes a record year : the US company reached in 2020 a turnover of 77, $ 9 billion , in growth of 8% over the previous year. In fourth quarter sales reached 20 billions of dollars, above the October expectations of 2.6 billion, but in 1% decrease over the same period of 2019. Earnings per share of 1, 42 dollars, albeit down by 10 %, exceeded forecasts.
Net profit stopped at $ 5.9 billion, – 15%, even if taking as reference the result of the whole year it proved to be quite stable, losing only the 1% and thus decreasing to 20, $ 9 billion. In this case the impact of taxation, which has risen since 14, 4% al 21, 8%, made themselves heard. “We significantly exceeded our expectations for the quarter, crowning our fifth consecutive record year “, commented the outgoing CEO. “The demand for the computing power that Intel offers remains strong and our focus on growth opportunities is paying off. It has been an honor to lead this magnificent company and I am proud of what we have achieved as a team. Intel is in a strong financial position. and strategic at a time when we concretize this strategic transition and take Intel to the next level “.
Q4 2020
Q4 2019
vs. Q4 2019
Turnover (billions of dollars)
20
20,2
– 1%
Gross margin
56, 8%
58, 8%
– 2 ppt
R&D and MG&A (billions of dollars)
5.4
5
+ 9%
Operating margin
29, 5 %
33, 6%
– 4.2 ppt
Tax rate
21, 8%
14, 4%
+ 7.4 ppt
Net profit (billions of dollars)
5.9
6.9
– 15%
Earnings per share (dollars)
1, 42
1, 58
– 10%
The pandemic has been a cure-all for Intel’s accounts , with millions of consumers who found themselves having to renew their technological equipment ( notebook in particular) due to the new needs of remote work and study. Online service providers have also had to upgrade their datacenters to meet a renewed demand from their customers. However, not everything is “roses and flowers” from a financial point of view. The gross margin remains below the 60%, a historical “psychological” value for the company, stopping at 56, 8% in the quarter (down by 2 points on the same period of ‘last year) due to both greater production investments and the competitive and economic situation.
In the fourth quarter it was particularly the CCG division (Client Computing Group) , that of the CPUs for notebooks and desktop PCs, with a turnover up 9% at 10, $ 9 billion . Overall, in 2020, the division grew by 8% achieving sales for 40, $ 1 billion. Intel said it saw a + 33% in fourth quarter CPU sales, backed by record-breaking notebook sales.
2020
2019
vs. 2019
Turnover (billions of dollars)
77, 9
72
+ 8%
Gross margin
56%
58, 6%
– 2.5 ppt
R&D and MG & A (billions of dollars)
19, 7
19, 7
–
Operating margin
30, 4%
30, 6%
– 0.2 ppt
Tax rate
16, 7%
12, 5%
+ 4.2 ppt
Net profit (billions of dollars)
20, 9
21
– 1%
Helpful per share (dollars)
4, 94
4, 71
+ 5%
Flow of operating cash
35, 4
33, 1
+ 7%
“We are seeing a very strong market response to our 11th Generation Tiger Lake CPU Core PCs . Our customers offer over 150 systems, well above expectations. We believe we have gained market share in terms of CPU units in the PC sector with a growth of 33% in the quarter . In a market where competitors are facing problems supply, this is a clear example of the incredible value and scale of our network of factories as we continue We want to offer greater performance and cost efficiency to our customers “, the company management pointed out.
Looking at the sales volumes in detail, it turns out that most of the growth is due to notebooks . Volumes registered by desktop processors increased by 22% on Q3 2020, with a decrease of 7% on Q4 2019 he was born in 01% in the comparison between the integer 2020 and the 2010. Turnover related to laptops has soared by 30% compared to the same period last year, with volumes increased by 54% on Q4 2019, although with a decrease in the average price linked to the sale of a greater number of models to low cost, especially Chromebooks.
The division of servers , Data Center Group ( DCG ) saw turnover stop at $ 6.1 billion in the fourth quarter, down 16% on Q4 2019, but the trend over the whole year is clear: + 11% to 26, 1 billion. The quarterly figure is due to a mix of factors, from AMD’s increased competition with EPYC CPUs (which is reflected in a falling average price of 12% in Q4 and 3% year-on-year by virtue of the heavily lowered price lists of Xeon CPUs compared to the past) to the macroeconomic environment to arrive at a physiological slowdown in investments from the cloud sector after the previous quarters.
Intel Divisions
Q4 2020
vs. Q4 2019
2020
vs. 2019
Centric date
DCG
6.1 billion
– 16%
26, 1 billion
+ 11%
Internet of Things
IOTG
777 millions
– 16%
3 billion
– 21%
Mobileye
333 millions
+ 39%
967 millions
+ 10%
NSG
1.2 billion
– 1%
5.4 billion
+ 23%
PSG
422 millions
– 16%
1.9 billion
– 7%
– 11%
+ 9%
PC centric
CCG
10, 9 billion
+ 9%
40, 1 billion
+ 8%
Sales records also for Mobileye , the Israeli company that offers assisted and autonomous driving solutions, which in the quarter reached 333 million dollars (+ 39%) , while the IOTG (Internet of Things Group) division lost the 16% to 777 Millions of dollars. The NSG (Non-volatile Memory Storage Group) and PSG (Programmable Solutions Group) segments close the picture, with revenues down by 1% and respectively) %, although over the entire year the NSG division has developed a + 23% (pity that the NAND business is destined for SK hynix).
In the 2020 Intel has invested 13, 6 billion in research and development and 14, 3 billion were injected into the purchase of new machinery and the upgrading of production , “while focusing on strengthening our CPU core business, improving execution and accelerating growth,” the company added. Intel expects revenue in the first fiscal quarter 2021 of about 18, $ 6 billion , where last year it touched 19, 8 billion: however, it must be remembered that the world was starting to seriously face the pandemic and consequently Intel benefited of an initial surge in technology purchases.
The German company Tuxedo brings that 15, 6-inch notebook InfinityBook S 15 with Intel’s Tiger Lake processors and pre-installed Linux operating system. Thanks to its compact dimensions, the model is quite light, and also provides a 73 -Watt-hour battery for a long runtime.
The heart of the InfinityBook S 15 optionally forms a Core i5 – 1135 G7 or Core i7 – 1165 G7 Intel’s 10 Nanometer Production. Both come with four CPU cores, but the i7 model has a higher clock rate, uses more level 3 cache and has a more powerful graphics unit. Both models have Tuxedo with a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 28 watts run, which ensures high turbo clock frequencies.
Long battery life and many connections The 15 , 6-inch IPS display covers 74 percent of the sRGB color space and lights up with up to 300 cd / m². The housing is made of aluminum and plastic; the complete notebook weighs around 1, 74 kilograms. The battery should last up to 19 hours – under realistic office conditions, Tuxedo promises 11 hours at half display brightness.
On the connection side, the InfinityBook S is 15 well equipped: 1 × Thunderbolt 4 as USB-C port including USB 4, DisplayPort Altmode and Power Delivery, 2 × USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbit / s, once each type A and type C), 1 × USB 2.0 type A, HDMI 2.0, audio combo jack, micro SD card reader and Gigabit Ethernet. Wi-Fi 6 (WLAN 802. 11 ax) and Bluetooth 5.1 are also included.
Tuxedo InfinityBook S 15 (19 Pictures) (Image: Tuxedo) From 802 Euro can be pre-ordered The basic configuration of the InfinityBook S 15 with Core i5 – 1135 G7, 250 GByte small SATA-6G-SSD and 8 GByte DDR4-SDRAM costs just under 940 Euro. Buyers can have various operating systems preinstalled, from the Tuxedo OS they have customized themselves to Ubuntu LTS and openSUSE – Windows 10 are available at an additional cost. If you want to save money, order without an SSD and retrofit one yourself. The interior is freely accessible thanks to the removable underside. Delivery is to begin at the end of February 2020.
Comparable notebooks with Tiger Lake CPU, lightweight housing and 250 – cd / m² display are available in small numbers 700 Euro available, but without the promised Linux compatibility and less maintenance-friendly.
( mma)
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.
