The Ryzen 5 4600H is AMD's new mainstream processor in their H-series, designed for high performance productivity and gaming notebooks. This is the chip AMD is selling for entry-level systems, and yet it's a compelling piece of silicon with 6 Zen 2 CPU cores and 12 threads, a base frequency of 3.0 GHz, 8MB of L3 cache and a 45W TDP.
Which additional productivity software would you suggest?
I am all about game performance. As such I suggest that the same games tested in the GPU reviews be used here to measure CPU scaling and overall CPU based gaming performance. Those with investment in productivity software can make suggestions on specifics in that catagory.
A gaming review is coming soon, just wait for a bit longer until they manage to get a laptop that doesn't have the weakest Nvidia GPU of all of the laptops tested here
I'd also like to see gaming benchmarks but also investigations about how intel and AMD platforms compare when running sustained workloads (like games) for hours. How do they sustain clock rates and how do they compare in terms of throttling?
Most benchmarks in the review are real-life ones, not synthetic (e.g. PCMark). Gaming is missing because this CPU is so new, there are no ways to compare it against laptops with the same GPU (the biggest factor driving gaming performance).
IS it? Where are the benchmarks showing this? oh, right, they are not in the review, which was kinda my point.
Why must everything be at 1080p high for you guys? When I still had a laptop with an APU in it, I wasnt trying to push 1080p. I was running older games at 720p that the APU could handle. Some of us might be curious how this APU handles games at lower resolutions or older games that were not as well threaded. Especially since:
The ryzen 4000 APUs show promising gaming performance on their iGPUs. This is something many of us would be interested in. "real gaming" doesnt require a 2080ti and 4k resoution you know. And this laptop DOES have a dGPU, a new one, the 1650ti, and some of us would like to see how it stacks compared to other dGPUs currently on the market.
I appreciate the work you put in, but even without comparable mobile GPUs (and really, you dont have any 1650s or 1660s or 1660ti mobile GPUs to compare? You know those will be a competitor to the 1650ti as well? Some may like to see how this 1650ti/ryzen combo fares against intel/1660 laptops) there are still games like Starcraft II that are heavily single thread limited that would be interesting to see if mobile ryzen 4000 is any significant improvement from ryzen 3000, and if so if AMD's turbo boost allows for this higher performance ot be sustained longer then Intel's mobile parts. As we saw with ryzen 3000, synthetic and even productivity benchmarks do not mean that gaming performance will scale at the same rate. It would be nice to see some of these more limited gaming scenarios tested to see if there is much improvement from ryzen 4000 mobile.
