AMD launches Ryzen 6000 series for laptops: What's new with the Zen 3+ architecture?

Scorpus

Posts: 2,162   +239
Staff member
Forward-looking: AMD is launching today the new Ryzen 6000 Mobile processors and we're able to disclose all information about the APU architecture, including performance benchmarks. Unfortunately we only received our review hardware a few days ago in the form of the new Asus ROG Zephyrus G14, which wasn't enough time to complete our benchmark suite. But rest assured, we’ll have a full review and breakdown of the Ryzen 9 6980HS very soon. In the meantime, let's address this: what exactly is the new Zen 3+ architecture?

As announced back at CES, Ryzen Mobile 6000 is based on a new APU design that's a complete overhaul of the platform. Everything has been upgraded, from new Zen 3+ CPU cores, to RDNA 2 integrated graphics, to DDR5 support and more. AMD’s previous APUs have lagged a little behind in the features department -- for example only including PCIe 3.0 support and outdated Vega graphics -- so this is a large redesign to bring Ryzen APUs up to speed with competitors like Intel 12th-gen.

One of the key improvements is the move from Zen 3 to Zen 3+. AMD says this is a “highly efficient core” and that “the plus is all about efficiency,” but what does this actually mean? How does it differ compared to Zen 3? What are the potential performance gains on offer, and where do they come from?

Essentially, all the changes made to Zen 3+ vs. Zen 3 are focused on reducing consumption and optimizing for efficiency. AMD told us there are no fundamental IPC improvements with Zen 3+ compared to Zen 3, indicating that the fundamental building blocks of the CPU core, such as the micro-op queues, branch predictors, execution engine, ALUs and so on, are all unchanged. We also see the same cache layout with 16MB of L3 and 4MB of L2.

Where the differences lie is in how these CPU elements are managed and how optimized the design is. AMD lists a key feature of Zen 3+ as being design optimizations to reduce leakage, but the majority of the changes are to power management. More sleep states with deeper control over individual elements of the CPU architecture, such as the new CPPC per thread capability and an enhanced CC1 state to sleep cores when not utilized. Zen 3+ can also now delay L3 initialization among other new features. AMD claims there are over 50 changes and we only got previewed on a handful of them.

Key to achieving some of these goals is the shift from TSMC’s N7 to N6 node, which provides an improvement in performance vs power thanks to the introduction of EUV layers in the manufacturing process. 6nm isn’t a massive step up over 7nm, it’s an iterative evolution on the same technology that assists AMD in enhancing performance per watt for Zen 3+.

But the efficiency enhancements don’t stop with the Zen 3+ CPU core, they extend to the entire SoC. These Ryzen 6000 APUs include better partitioning of various SoC components, such as the GPU and display engine, allowing for tighter control over power. An example of this would be using a laptop that supports panel self refresh. These new APUs have the ability to fully power off the display section of the APU when panel self refresh is engaged, reducing power for that element, potentially while the CPU is being run at full power for a background render.

There are other enhancements such as improved clock gating, better current control methodologies, and new deep low power states. The key goal of many of these was to reduce power consumption during extremely brief periods of rest, such as a single millisecond where the system isn’t doing anything. Ensuring the system is consuming the minimum amount of power during any periods of rest extends battery life.

When you have new CPU and SoC architectures designed for efficiency, the goal is typically to improve battery life and performance per watt. AMD was throwing around numbers like “24 hours of battery life,” but it’s always hard to know exactly what that means and in what context -- like how the system was being used.

In a more apples to apples comparison, AMD is claiming 8% longer battery life in Windows idle, 12% in modern standby and 17% in video playback comparing 6000U to 5000U series processors at 15W. At CES, AMD also showed claims like 30% lower power consumption for video conferencing, 15% lower for Chrome browsing, and so on. I’m sure we’ll see test results for those claims shortly.

But this also throws up the question, if the design is optimized for efficiency, Zen 3+ has no IPC improvement and all the changes are to enhance performance per watt. So does performance actually improve this generation? According to AMD, the answer is yes, due to two factors.

In optimizing for efficiency, AMD has improved performance per watt with Zen 3 and Ryzen 6000 APUs. In power constrained form factors like laptops, this doesn’t typically reduce power usage -- the chip will still run at 15W, 28W, 45W or any limit that is set for that APU. So if the watts stay the same, and performance per watt improves, what must get better? That's performance, of course.

For Ryzen Mobile 6000, that’s coming in the form of a clock speed boost, and we see that across the line-up. The Ryzen 7 6800U tops out at 4.7 GHz up from 4.4 GHz, while the H series parts now hit 5.0 GHz, up from 4.8 GHz. 35W HS parts have higher base clocks as well, improved by up to 10 percent, while the U series gets up to a 40 percent bump.

Based on the data AMD has shared so far, it seems clear that the performance gains from Ryzen 6000 and Zen 3+ are going to be larger at lower power limits. Shaving off half a watt makes a big difference at 15W, but a comparatively small difference at 45W. This is also why Zen 3+ isn’t headed to the desktop as a mid-cycle refresh before Zen 4 arrives. Zen 3+ might have delivered better power consumption, but without gains to IPC, it just wasn’t going to bring a big jump in performance.

These new changes are also different to when Zen was upgraded into Zen+, and also play into why Zen 3+ isn’t targeting desktop platforms. While Zen+ did focus on improving efficiency and raising clock speeds, and like Zen 3+ it used a revised process node, Zen+ also saw reductions in cache and memory latency, increased cache bandwidth and a several other features for a slim 3% jump in IPC (which combined with a higher clock, it resulted in a respectable performance uplift). Zen 3+ doesn’t appear to feature the same optimizations to cache, and as a result doesn’t see higher IPC versus Zen 3.

There are a few other features introduced with Ryzen Mobile 6000 worth mentioning, so let’s cover them. A huge improvement is the use of RDNA2 graphics, finally ditching Vega compute units. The switch over to RDNA2 also brings more compute units for Ryzen 6000, 12 vs. 8 and we’re now finally seeing more CUs than we got with the original range of Zen+ APUs that packed 11.

The RDNA2 GPU is available in two configurations: the Radeon 680M in Ryzen 7 and 9 APUs and the Radeon 660M in Ryzen 5. The difference is 12 vs. 6 compute units, and 2.4 vs. 1.9 GHz clock speeds. AMD is claiming huge generational performance differences, up to 2x at higher power levels, but of course, we’ll be able to test that soon.

Ryzen Mobile 6000 exclusively uses DDR5 or LPDDR5X technology, at up to 4800 and 6400 speeds, respectively. To be clear, that means no DDR4 support here. This might increase laptop prices slightly compared to previous generation DDR4-based systems, however we’ve been told from several OEMs that DDR5 supply and pricing is reasonable compared to the often horrific scenes we see for desktop modules. DDR5 support is crucial for the performance gains seen with the new RDNA2 GPU.

Ryzen Mobile 6000 supports USB4, including all the bells and whistles like PCIe over USB, 240W of power delivery, various display protocols and so on, depending on how the OEM implements the port. AMD USB4 ports will also support Thunderbolt devices, one of the crucial but optional features of the USB spec, although they’re not advertising this capability just yet as they are still putting it through the certification process. This will give AMD laptops Thunderbolt interoperability for the first time (finally).

The display engine supports HDMI 2.1 at up to 48 Gbps, the full HDMI 2.1 spec; and DisplayPort 2 up to 40 Gbps, the second from highest DisplayPort 2 configuration (this is UHBR 10 not UHBR 20) and the first time we’ve seen a device support DisplayPort 2 output. And up to 4 display outputs, more than the standalone discrete Radeon RX 6500 XT GPU.

The media engine has been upgraded to support AV1 decoding and VCN 3.1, which is actually a step newer than VCN 3.0 we get with Navi 2 GPUs based on RDNA2. This is a big improvement over prior GPUs which only used VCN 2.x and didn’t support emerging tech like AV1. Combined with the much faster iGPU, this should lead to large gains in hardware accelerated apps like Adobe Premiere.

PCIe 4.0 is supported in an eight lane configuration for discrete graphics. This is an improvement over the PCIe 3.0 we got previously, and as such provides double the bandwidth, however it’s not the move up to x16 lanes that many would have liked to see. Despite this, Intel 12th-gen mobile parts are also limited to PCIe 4.0 x8 support.

Finally, we have support for on-die active noise cancellation in a low power state, and Microsoft’s Pluton security processor.

That’s a quick overview of what Ryzen 6000 series APUs are looking like from an architecture standpoint, and the features they are set to provide. We’ll be back soon with a full-on performance test.

Permalink to story.

 
From what I've seen, the battery life on these things is incredible (reminds me of the M1). This is exactly what I wanted from a laptop. Now all we need are some decent laptop designs and I'll definitely upgrade this summer. The one I'm using now is showing its age and I don't plan on carrying a full desktop replacement with me.
 
From what I've seen, the battery life on these things is incredible (reminds me of the M1). This is exactly what I wanted from a laptop. Now all we need are some decent laptop designs and I'll definitely upgrade this summer. The one I'm using now is showing its age and I don't plan on carrying a full desktop replacement with me.
yeah, I think I'll take the better battery life and IGP of these new APUs over the faster CPU IPC of Alder Lake laptops.
 
yeah, I think I'll take the better battery life and IGP of these new APUs over the faster CPU IPC of Alder Lake laptops.
The better IGP is nice, but I think I'll add an RTX3060 or lower as the GPU since I want to do some 3D stuff (not just gaming). It will hurt some of the battery life, but it should still be much better.
 
Last edited:
From what I've seen, the battery life on these things is incredible (reminds me of the M1). This is exactly what I wanted from a laptop. Now all we need are some decent laptop designs and I'll definitely upgrade this summer. The one I'm using now is showing its age and I don't plan on carrying a full desktop replacement with me.
The battery life on this thing won’t be anything like an M1 equipped MacBook, it still uses the same power as the 5000 series just allows users to get a bit more clock speed. The efficiency difference between a part like this and Apples ARM based M1 is enormous. X86 is less efficient by its very nature. Looking it up, the M1 uses 8.7W when running cinebench.

I dont think you understand just how much more efficient the M1 is to a laptop X86 CPU lol.
 
The battery life on this thing won’t be anything like an M1 equipped MacBook, it still uses the same power as the 5000 series just allows users to get a bit more clock speed. The efficiency difference between a part like this and Apples ARM based M1 is enormous. X86 is less efficient by its very nature. Looking it up, the M1 uses 8.7W when running cinebench.

I dont think you understand just how much more efficient the M1 is to a laptop X86 CPU lol.
I don't think you really know, as it really isn't that much more efficient. It is more efficient no doubt, but many factors play into this. And being ARM is not one of them.

The M1 is a highly integrated chip, with everything on a single package. There isn't a X86 chip like that, nor has there been a need for one. Thin and light is not where the money is, Enterprise is. Apple also enjoys a massive node advantage.

The 6000 series is a massive step up from the 5000 series in regards to battery life. Some of it has to do with the new node, some of it is from the move to RDNA 2 and how horrible Vega was with Idle power usage.

When it comes to light workloads and idle power usage the 6000 series is a massive improvement and battery life improvements have already shown to be massive. Most workloads are light, not heavy, So while battery life with a heavily load may only have improved 20-30%, battery life with light loads is nearly 100% improved.

I own a m1 macbook air, battery life when the machine is under a heavy load vs normal light loads are two different beasts.

The Standby power usage for windows machines have always been partly a windows problem. As I've used Surface devices that could sit in standby mode for a month and only drop a few % on the battery, while a Dell laptop could hardly make it a day in standby.

Apple's M1 Performance Cores are not a whole deal more efficient than Zen 3 in theory.
 
The battery life on this thing won’t be anything like an M1 equipped MacBook, it still uses the same power as the 5000 series just allows users to get a bit more clock speed. The efficiency difference between a part like this and Apples ARM based M1 is enormous. X86 is less efficient by its very nature. Looking it up, the M1 uses 8.7W when running cinebench.

I dont think you understand just how much more efficient the M1 is to a laptop X86 CPU lol.
We don't yet have numbers from Steve, but Linus did an A-B test (6900HS vs 5900HS) of the same laptop, the Zephyrus G14 (last gen vs new) and it had almost double the battery life in the youtube video playback test: 5h42m vs 11h11m.

This could be a result from a combination of 3 factors: the CPU, the iGPU and ddr5 ram (the battery was the same size and the screen the same one too).

Other tests could show vastly different results depending on how much they push the CPU and iGPU.

If I can watch youtube and Netflix for many hours then I am happy. Gaming and other heavy stuff can be done while plugged in.

I may not be interested in the iGPU perf that much since I want a laptop with a dGPU, but those very light and thin laptops it seems that AMD is the way to go. the 6900HS could be twice as fast as the full 12900HK in gaming without a discreet GPU.
 
Last edited:
When you test power consumption, can you test a lot of applications ?? Not just blender or whatever.

How much it consume when doing photoshop, browsing, office application etc. We need to see how it consume in variety of works. Most people are not going to run blender
 
I don't think you really know, as it really isn't that much more efficient. It is more efficient no doubt, but many factors play into this. And being ARM is not one of them.

The M1 is a highly integrated chip, with everything on a single package. There isn't a X86 chip like that, nor has there been a need for one. Thin and light is not where the money is, Enterprise is. Apple also enjoys a massive node advantage.

The 6000 series is a massive step up from the 5000 series in regards to battery life. Some of it has to do with the new node, some of it is from the move to RDNA 2 and how horrible Vega was with Idle power usage.

When it comes to light workloads and idle power usage the 6000 series is a massive improvement and battery life improvements have already shown to be massive. Most workloads are light, not heavy, So while battery life with a heavily load may only have improved 20-30%, battery life with light loads is nearly 100% improved.

I own a m1 macbook air, battery life when the machine is under a heavy load vs normal light loads are two different beasts.

The Standby power usage for windows machines have always been partly a windows problem. As I've used Surface devices that could sit in standby mode for a month and only drop a few % on the battery, while a Dell laptop could hardly make it a day in standby.

Apple's M1 Performance Cores are not a whole deal more efficient than Zen 3 in theory.
You are incorrect. The battery life of an M1 equipped max laughs at any X86 machine. It also has no fan and the devices can be extremely thin and light. It’s a completely different beast.

It is incredibly delusional to believe that the 6000 series is a “massive step up from the 5000” series in any regard, this is a refresh. I’m actually laughing at how someone can read up on the 6000 series and see it as anything more but a slightl refresh.

You clearly don’t understand what the M1 is or how it works. I certainly don’t believe you own one. ARM technology is massively disruptive. It is so much more efficient that I can’t see laptops using X86 Intel or AMD CPUs as soon as ARM becomes readily available on Windows with better compatibility than it currently has.
 
You clearly don’t understand what the M1 is or how it works. I certainly don’t believe you own one. ARM technology is massively disruptive. It is so much more efficient that I can’t see laptops using X86 Intel or AMD CPUs as soon as ARM becomes readily available on Windows with better compatibility than it currently has.
M1 efficiency has Nothing to do with ARM. There are two major factors: First is node advantage (TSMC 5nm) and another is die space waster aka SOC integrated memory. Current x86 chips have neither of those, making x86 vs ARM comparison totally pointless. This is something almost every ARM promoter "forget" to say.
 
You are incorrect. The battery life of an M1 equipped max laughs at any X86 machine. It also has no fan and the devices can be extremely thin and light. It’s a completely different beast.

It is incredibly delusional to believe that the 6000 series is a “massive step up from the 5000” series in any regard, this is a refresh. I’m actually laughing at how someone can read up on the 6000 series and see it as anything more but a slightl refresh.

You clearly don’t understand what the M1 is or how it works. I certainly don’t believe you own one. ARM technology is massively disruptive. It is so much more efficient that I can’t see laptops using X86 Intel or AMD CPUs as soon as ARM becomes readily available on Windows with better compatibility than it currently has.
You are funny. The M1 isn't disruptive, it just benefits from a dedicated platform and a 5nm process node (which is still a gen ahead of the 6nm used here)

AMD should be able to get close to some of these results while running Windows:

Just so you understand why 5nm is so important and why Apple is buying all of the early production. TSMC's 5nm, which Apple is using for the M1, has an 40% reduction in power draw compared to 7nm, with a 45% reduction in area size. (the diff between 6nm and 7nm is mostly just the 15% reduction in area size, not perf/W)

Imagine adding another 40% to the 11 hours the 6500HS got in youtube playback. Not bad for x86, right?
 
Last edited:
You are incorrect. The battery life of an M1 equipped max laughs at any X86 machine. It also has no fan and the devices can be extremely thin and light. It’s a completely different beast.

It is incredibly delusional to believe that the 6000 series is a “massive step up from the 5000” series in any regard, this is a refresh. I’m actually laughing at how someone can read up on the 6000 series and see it as anything more but a slightl refresh.

You clearly don’t understand what the M1 is or how it works. I certainly don’t believe you own one. ARM technology is massively disruptive. It is so much more efficient that I can’t see laptops using X86 Intel or AMD CPUs as soon as ARM becomes readily available on Windows with better compatibility than it currently has.
I ordered a M1 Macbook Air day one, its been a great laptop. But if you've ever tried to play a game on it, battery life changes up quite a bit. Judging the M1 based only on light workloads is misleading. If anything the Macbook just shows how bad some laptop manufactures are when it comes to their platform management. As I've used surface laptops that have macbook levels of standby power usage, while my dell workstation laptop wouldn't survive 24hr's in standby.

M1 is a highly integrated SOC. RAM on on the package along with the entire chipset. The SSD is located externally, but kept close. So there really isn't much out of this SOC Cluster. This keeps power down and latency low. It is also not a cheap design. It is not a small chip. Its a fairly expensive chip to make.

The M1 is not magic. And there have been plenty of real works tests showing just that. But it is a good Chip for a device that isn't going to do much more than basic workloads. It's a horrible gaming platform, When it comes to performance peak multi and single thread isn't better than X86 devices. The only thing going for it is battery life for general usage. Something that only a few windows devices focus on. Money just isn't there to be made.

AMD's #1 goal is to replace Xeon sales. As breaking into the Business Desktop/laptop world is hard and nearly exclusively intel.

But we already have reviews showing the 6800HS nearly doubling battery runtime of the 5800HS with nearly everything else being the same. You'd be surprised on how much a Die Shrink and something as simple as more efficient H.264 decoders can make a difference.

Also don't forget this is not a small update. It has a updated internal chipset that uses ddr5 and brings in much improved power efficiency. Performance at 100% load may not have improved much, but that was never the issue. The Move from Vega to RDNA2 is a massive one BTW.

ARM is not massively disruptive. Otherwise the Server market would have more options for ARM. Sadly performance just isn't there. I'd love to see a Mainline Dell Server packing some high performance ARM Cores, but that is still years away. ESXI has been ported to ARM, so we know it will be coming. Ryzen keep pushing the bar for performance per watt in the server world.

ARM is nothing more than a instruction set. Early on AMD had to versions of Zen, one running ARM Micro-ops and the other running x86 micro-ops. Clearly the ARM version didn't make much since as they stopped progress on it years ago. Most likely because X86 can do anything ARM can do, if pushed to do so.

Apple will be moving to 3nm node and will again be further ahead in the node advantage. The Real winner is TSMC.

Until AMD or Intel move away from X86, don't expect it to go anywhere.
 
I would be interested in seeing how this does with Ubuntu, and particularly the Mint derivative.

I have been aggravated quite a bit by a 3-year old Dell Inspiron 7000 that I bought new, running the latest Mint versions over those 3 years on its AMD Ryzen 5 2500U with Radeon Vega Mobile Gfx. I was hoping for less CPU hacking security exposures, and avoiding Intel's management engine as well as MS dependency (been on Linux for main home platform for self and wife for over 10 years now).

But this Dell AMD/Linux keeps locking up, and/or randomly losing support from one bootup to the next for backlight management. The lockups have decreased in frequency substantially as Mint has progressed with kernel versions from 5.4 to 5.13, but 5.ll and 5.13, seem to have had ongoing issues with sporadic AMD video support (stays on max brightness no matter what). I never know from one boot to the next whether the video will "behave" with function key dimming, or not. I have found kernel discussions indicating that this seems to be an ongoing issue with Linux kernel AMD support.

The wife's Dell Latitude E7440 with an Intel Core I5 Haswell has no such problems. Thinking about getting one similar (12-13" screen preferred) with Intel CPU/GPU from eBay as I did to get hers. Not a gamer or developer in my retirement (40 years in IT), but heavy "Internet haunter"/finance management/corresponder. Could save money, time, aggravation...

Any insights would be appreciated.
 
The better IGP is nice, but I think I'll add an RTX3060 or lower as the GPU since I want to do some 3D stuff (not just gaming). It will hurt some of the battery life, but it should still be much better.

I must agree here, Alder Lake simply offers much the same stuff but more overall performance. Also Zen3+ is not necessarily focused to increase battery life other than in idle state, they just can squeeze more performance per watt now. The choice between Intel and AMD platform is pretty much a choice between overall performance and little more battery life, but of course a powerful system is totally possible on Zen3+ too. Pricing will be interesting to see. Impressive work on improving Zen3 from AMD nonetheless.
 
"You clearly don’t understand what the M1 is or how it works. I certainly don’t believe you own one".

Loosen up - calling someone a liar , based on no evidence is not cool.

Even Apple fans will freely admit the M1 is not 100% perfect - it's great we have it . It's great AMD is pushing efficiency.
Lets get real - we are talking about energy efficient light bulbs of power - As an astute commentator said above - for max load applications like gaming - most people will have it plugged in . But for Netflix , YouTube it will do just fine . Especially with CPU AV1 decoding .

Apple are hypocrites anyway - they always reduce battery size to get every phone the same effective battery life - They are control freaks - and do that 100% on purpose - you want a 5000mAh or more it won't be Apple

To use Apples logic battery life beyond a certain point is meaningless to most users .
It's like claiming you can watch your monitor 170 degrees of axis - who cares , who does that

anyway not calling someone a liar based solely on your hatred of AMD
 
This makes a mockery of Intel's efficiency claims. The 12900H needs 110W to beat the 6900HS but at 25-60W the AMD destroys the Intel and gets much better battery life. So for an actual portable device not plugged into the wall AMD is massively better choice.

Oh and for gaming the RDNA2 GPU obliterate the Intel GPU, more than double the frame rates at 1080p low settings.
 
I must agree here, Alder Lake simply offers much the same stuff but more overall performance. Also Zen3+ is not necessarily focused to increase battery life other than in idle state, they just can squeeze more performance per watt now. The choice between Intel and AMD platform is pretty much a choice between overall performance and little more battery life, but of course a powerful system is totally possible on Zen3+ too. Pricing will be interesting to see. Impressive work on improving Zen3 from AMD nonetheless.
AMD already had the the battery life lead with the 5000 series.
 
The battery life on this thing won’t be anything like an M1 equipped MacBook, it still uses the same power as the 5000 series just allows users to get a bit more clock speed. The efficiency difference between a part like this and Apples ARM based M1 is enormous. X86 is less efficient by its very nature. Looking it up, the M1 uses 8.7W when running cinebench.

I dont think you understand just how much more efficient the M1 is to a laptop X86 CPU lol.

No, you don't understand the very basics of CPU and SoC architecture.

You're just throwing around buzzwords and regurgitating what you've heard in the tech press and community.
 
This has nothing to do with my hatred of Radeon. I don’t hate AMD CPUs. But either way, the battery life of an M1 device is vastly superior to X86 laptops. Anyone who sits there and claims they are matched or even close are lying through their teeth. They are directly contradicting what all the reviewers tell us. I also haven’t mentioned that X86 throttles itself on battery when the M1 performs identically on battery or plugged in.

Apple isn’t perfect, the M1 isn’t perfect. But it’s massively more efficicent than any X86 CPU.

it seems a lot of people are letting their love for AMD or hatred of Apple cloud their vision. Apple have done a revolutionary thing with the M1 and that is probably really annoying for their haters. The amount of ignorance surrounding the M1 is epic.
 
Apple also enjoys a massive node advantage.

The 6000 series is a massive step up from the 5000 series in regards to battery life.
True for the node. It's easy to be on a more advanced node and be more efficient when you are a super rich company cattering for high-end user.

Apple's efficiency goes down the drain with eye-watering prices on their devices, which are not affordable by vast majority of people on this planet. More than €3,000 for a laptop. Silly... I'd rather pay for food provision in a refugee camp than buy such expensive laptop that would make me feel better about its efficiency.

Battery life on 6000 has improved and that is welcomed. I would not use the word "massive". Too emotive. Battery life should improve every single year, and not just due to tinkering around CPU, GPU and motherboard. Battery manufacturers are expected to be even more innovative, so that one single change lasts for days, and then for weeks in 10 years time. There's got to be the way and university research is promising. Business needs to buy into it...
 
How much it consume when doing photoshop, browsing, office application etc. We need to see how it consume in variety of works. Most people are not going to run blender
Even longer battery life with lighter apps. Browsing video content could be tricky and bright display.
 
ARM technology is massively disruptive. It is so much more efficient that I can’t see laptops using X86 Intel or AMD CPUs as soon as ARM becomes readily available on Windows with better compatibility than it currently has.
ARM Gen 9 is great, but the problem for silicon is production costs on ever smaller nodes that allow for great efficiency. If we are going to have very efficient and top performing devices for the masses, we can't sell those for €3,000. It's not sustainable, including in rich countries. Plus, laptops in general need to be far more modular, like Framework idea, to increase their lifespan by upgrading different modules and recycling used/old ones. Apple and several othr companies have not been as friendly in that regard. For exmaple, Dell selling proprietary modules that no one can properly or easily exchange.
 
Back