AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS Review: Can it beat Alder Lake?

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
Once again... why waste all that money on the top-of-the-line CPU and then cripple it?

Yes, you can game on an iGPU... but why?!?!

As for unsubscribing... don't let the door hit you on the way out :)
Lower power consumption? These CPU's are meant for laptops that (sometimes) run battery powered.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
Lower power consumption? These CPU's are meant for laptops that (sometimes) run battery powered.
Yes... but most people don't game on battery... the 6900, unfortunately, has a very small niche of users: those who need high CPU performance without requiring a discrete GPU...

The vast majority of people who need high CPU performance also require high GPU performance. And once you need this, you need to be plugged in, eliminating AMD's only advantage in this tier...

Once again, if Alder Lake didn't exist (and performed so bloody awesomely), this would be the best CPU you could buy, and AMD could name their price. Alas for AMD, it does exist, and it beats the pants off of them... we will have to wait on pricing to see if they can compete.
 
The series yes.... but the 6900 is also meant to be the best mobile CPU you can buy... had Alder Lake not come out, it WOULD have been.... but since it ISN'T, Techspot is right to call it out...

We'll see if AMD compensates by lowering the price...
Get the $1,649 version, 6900HS, 6700s, 16gb RAM.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 1,016   +717
12700H match 6900HS performance per watt when both are at low power (35 to 45w) according to the review. While intel has advantage in power efficiency when both run a higher power (above 45 watt)
You need to look at those numbers and the information detailed a little closer, you're missing something.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
Yes... but most people don't game on battery... the 6900, unfortunately, has a very small niche of users: those who need high CPU performance without requiring a discrete GPU...

The vast majority of people who need high CPU performance also require high GPU performance. And once you need this, you need to be plugged in, eliminating AMD's only advantage in this tier...
What's the point buying laptop if not using it on battery? I have never understood why using laptop plugged in. Only real advantage laptop has against desktop is ability to run on battery. If that is gone, what's left? Nothing.

Also some professional software also need good GPU.
Once again, if Alder Lake didn't exist (and performed so bloody awesomely), this would be the best CPU you could buy, and AMD could name their price. Alas for AMD, it does exist, and it beats the pants off of them... we will have to wait on pricing to see if they can compete.
Alder Lake is way too power hungry for laptops. Performance is good but power consumption is horrible, making it suitable only as desktop replacement. Those who want real portable laptop, go for AMD. Those who rather plug laptop better use desktop instead.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
What's the point buying laptop if not using it on battery? I have never understood why using laptop plugged in. Only real advantage laptop has against desktop is ability to run on battery. If that is gone, what's left? Nothing.

Also some professional software also need good GPU.

Alder Lake is way too power hungry for laptops. Performance is good but power consumption is horrible, making it suitable only as desktop replacement. Those who want real portable laptop, go for AMD. Those who rather plug laptop better use desktop instead.
I'm not sure if you either misunderstood my previous posts or simply didn't read them... Of COURSE you want to use your laptop off of battery - but NOT for intensive tasks... you generally surf the web, work on office docs, watch youtube, etc...

When you are playing AAA games at max framerates, you are plugged in! That's the beauty of an expensive laptop - it can do both.

The AMD 6900 lets you do the former - but ANY CPU lets you do the former... you pay for the expensive CPU when you need the latter - and that's where Alder Lake wipes the floor with it.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
I'm not sure if you either misunderstood my previous posts or simply didn't read them... Of COURSE you want to use your laptop off of battery - but NOT for intensive tasks... you generally surf the web, work on office docs, watch youtube, etc...

When you are playing AAA games at max framerates, you are plugged in! That's the beauty of an expensive laptop - it can do both.

The AMD 6900 lets you do the former - but ANY CPU lets you do the former... you pay for the expensive CPU when you need the latter - and that's where Alder Lake wipes the floor with it.
And what if you have no chance to plug in? Ability to use with battery is about only advantage laptop have against desktop when it comes to AAA gaming.

And those who are not so concerned about battery use, can boy laptop with CPU without integrated GPU, like 5900X. It's faster than Alder Lake when plugged in. Again desktop does everything better than laptop when plugged in so we can mainly forget that scenario.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
And what if you have no chance to plug in? Ability to use with battery is about only advantage laptop have against desktop when it comes to AAA gaming.

And those who are not so concerned about battery use, can boy laptop with CPU without integrated GPU, like 5900X. It's faster than Alder Lake when plugged in. Again desktop does everything better than laptop when plugged in so we can mainly forget that scenario.
I think we are having a failure to communicate.... The point of a laptop is portability... you can have your computer wherever you want it...

When you pay top dollar for a laptop (and since this is AMD's fastest mobile CPU, expect to be paying that for anything which includes it), you will be using it for intensive projects - be they CAD, gaming, etc... Those intense projects will usually be performed PLUGGED IN - but whereas you can't move a desktop, you can plug your laptop in at home, work, etc...

When you are performing "light tasks" - like checking email at the cafeteria or browsing YouTube, etc... then you are using your battery - and don't need to use your dGPU...

But if your laptop is ONLY being used for these "light tasks"... you are a fool to be wasting money on the 6900!! The 6500, 12500, (or 3600, 9500, etc) will be more than sufficient.

Once again - if you are springing for the 6900, unless you are getting it cheaper than the 12700, you are wasting your money.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
I think we are having a failure to communicate.... The point of a laptop is portability... you can have your computer wherever you want it...

When you pay top dollar for a laptop (and since this is AMD's fastest mobile CPU, expect to be paying that for anything which includes it), you will be using it for intensive projects - be they CAD, gaming, etc... Those intense projects will usually be performed PLUGGED IN - but whereas you can't move a desktop, you can plug your laptop in at home, work, etc...

When you are performing "light tasks" - like checking email at the cafeteria or browsing YouTube, etc... then you are using your battery - and don't need to use your dGPU...

But if your laptop is ONLY being used for these "light tasks"... you are a fool to be wasting money on the 6900!! The 6500, 12500, (or 3600, 9500, etc) will be more than sufficient.

Once again - if you are springing for the 6900, unless you are getting it cheaper than the 12700, you are wasting your money.
You can carry it anywhere and use it even without plugging in. That's the point with laptop. Like I said, anything else desktop does better. And if one can afford laptop on this price range, he/she can also afford desktop.

Your logic has one very bad problem. That is: both 6900HS and 12700H packs Best integrated GPU there is available (from AMD and Intel respectively). That also means both are meant to be used with integrated GPU. There is absolutely no point wasting die space for top-of-the-line GPU (that could be used for additional CPU cores) and then use power hungry external GPU. That also means performance and power consumption when using integrated GPU is even more important than performance using just CPU. You may disagree but Intel and AMD both disagree with you. For casual use even low end GPU is more than enough.

I do agree that for casual use both CPU's are overkill. But again, putting best available integrated GPU for laptop that is meant to be use with external GPU makes no sense at all. Pretty much same as buying best APU (GPU wise) available and immediately put 1000+ dollar GPU next to it. And when using integrated GPU, 6900HS offers much better gaming performance.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
You can carry it anywhere and use it even without plugging in. That's the point with laptop. Like I said, anything else desktop does better. And if one can afford laptop on this price range, he/she can also afford desktop.
You can afford a desktop... but you still can't take it with you everywhere you go!! That's why you buy a laptop!
Your logic has one very bad problem. That is: both 6900HS and 12700H packs Best integrated GPU there is available (from AMD and Intel respectively). That also means both are meant to be used with integrated GPU. There is absolutely no point wasting die space for top-of-the-line GPU (that could be used for additional CPU cores) and then use power hungry external GPU. That also means performance and power consumption when using integrated GPU is even more important than performance using just CPU. You may disagree but Intel and AMD both disagree with you. For casual use even low end GPU is more than enough.
That integrated GPU is for when you are not plugged in - that's when you are surfing, emailing, etc... even light gaming... it's nice to be able to use your expensive laptop on the go!

But again, the 6900 is overkill for this part...
I do agree that for casual use both CPU's are overkill. But again, putting best available integrated GPU for laptop that is meant to be use with external GPU makes no sense at all. Pretty much same as buying best APU (GPU wise) available and immediately put 1000+ dollar GPU next to it. And when using integrated GPU, 6900HS offers much better gaming performance.
No... you use the dGPU when you are plugged in - this DOES make sense!! There is NO laptop that can play AAA games at 4K @ 60FPS+ - unless it is plugged in...
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
You can afford a desktop... but you still can't take it with you everywhere you go!! That's why you buy a laptop!
That's why you buy both. One can afford this expensive laptop can also afford desktop.
That integrated GPU is for when you are not plugged in - that's when you are surfing, emailing, etc... even light gaming... it's nice to be able to use your expensive laptop on the go!

But again, the 6900 is overkill for this part...
Exactly but you need expensive integrated GPU for those, even basic one is more than good enough.
No... you use the dGPU when you are plugged in - this DOES make sense!! There is NO laptop that can play AAA games at 4K @ 60FPS+ - unless it is plugged in...
It doesn't because using that logic, for light tasks iGPU is overkill and for gaming it's too slow. So why put expensive iGPU when basic one is equally good? These CPU's are meant to be used without external GPU.

For laptops meant to be plugged in, both AMD and Intel offer other CPU's. No, this is not AMD's fastest 6900-series CPU.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
That's why you buy both. One can afford this expensive laptop can also afford desktop.
Even if you have a desktop - you still buy the laptop because you want to use it in MULTIPLE places!!! I want to plug it in at work, at a client's, at my friends, at home... etc... unless you think I should buy 10 desktops and place them everywhere I go?
Exactly but you need expensive integrated GPU for those, even basic one is more than good enough.
You don't - but the beefier CPU allows for it, so you may as well add it in... eventually, we might even see an iGPU that is useful for "real" work...
It doesn't because using that logic, for light tasks iGPU is overkill and for gaming it's too slow. So why put expensive iGPU when basic one is equally good? These CPU's are meant to be used without external GPU.
It IS overkill - but it's hard to justify the premium of the 6900 over the 6700, 6600, etc... unless you actually make everything better :)
For laptops meant to be plugged in, both AMD and Intel offer other CPU's. No, this is not AMD's fastest 6900-series CPU.

The HX is a bit faster but - as Techspot has mentioned in previous articles - the only real difference is the 10W power difference allowing for slightly higher clock speeds. The 45W part will still get smoked by the 12700, let alone the 12900.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
Even if you have a desktop - you still buy the laptop because you want to use it in MULTIPLE places!!! I want to plug it in at work, at a client's, at my friends, at home... etc... unless you think I should buy 10 desktops and place them everywhere I go?
I take my light desktop on multiple places. Why not?
You don't - but the beefier CPU allows for it, so you may as well add it in... eventually, we might even see an iGPU that is useful for "real" work...
Faster GPU means slower CPU or more expensive CPU. It makes no sense at all if it's unused.
It IS overkill - but it's hard to justify the premium of the 6900 over the 6700, 6600, etc... unless you actually make everything better :)
There is currently no 6700. 6600 has only 6 cores, enough difference.
The HX is a bit faster but - as Techspot has mentioned in previous articles - the only real difference is the 10W power difference allowing for slightly higher clock speeds. The 45W part will still get smoked by the 12700, let alone the 12900.
Intel chips are faster with unlimited power consumption and when not considering GPU performance. But again, AMD put better GPU for reason. Those who want more CPU power without caring about battery life, might take desktop chips. Both desktop Ryzen and desktop Alder Lake smokes these mobile CPU's and if using external graphics, battery life will be poor. That makes me wonder how these CPU's are meant to be used if not using heavily iGPU with battery...
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
I take my light desktop on multiple places. Why not?
Because you are a fool?
Faster GPU means slower CPU or more expensive CPU. It makes no sense at all if it's unused.
It IS used - just for "light work" - do you even ready my posts before replying?
There is currently no 6700. 6600 has only 6 cores, enough difference.
Yes, sorry... just meant all of the lower tier parts... and for light tasks using an iGPU, the 6600 will operate the same as the 6900 for virtually everything.
Intel chips are faster with unlimited power consumption and when not considering GPU performance.
Yes, they are... which is why, if you are purchasing an expensive laptop for desktop replacement purposes, it makes sense to go Intel, not AMD!
But again, AMD put better GPU for reason. Those who want more CPU power without caring about battery life, might take desktop chips. Both desktop Ryzen and desktop Alder Lake smokes these mobile CPU's and if using external graphics, battery life will be poor. That makes me wonder how these CPU's are meant to be used if not using heavily iGPU with battery...
They are meant to be used plugged in obviously... the iGPU is for light work... please READ my posts...
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
Because you are a fool?
Because desktop is much more reliable? Laptops tend to broke after couple of years anyway.
It IS used - just for "light work" - do you even ready my posts before replying?
I do. Even for light work basic iGPU is more than enough. These iGPU's are for gaming.
Yes, sorry... just meant all of the lower tier parts... and for light tasks using an iGPU, the 6600 will operate the same as the 6900 for virtually everything.
This I agree, however also iGPU is 50% slower on 6600. That even more illustrates these GPU's are overkill outside gaming.
Yes, they are... which is why, if you are purchasing an expensive laptop for desktop replacement purposes, it makes sense to go Intel, not AMD!
For desktop replacement yes but something else not so.
They are meant to be used plugged in obviously... the iGPU is for light work... please READ my posts...
What is this "light work"? For "light work" even Intel's lowest end iGPU is more than enough. Sure there are certain scenarios where beefier iGPU is needed but basically it's either gaming or casual use. These are overkill for casual use.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
Because desktop is much more reliable? Laptops tend to broke after couple of years anyway.
But even a light desktop is a PAIN to travel with... you need a monitor, keyboard, mouse... not to mention power cords and stuff... it's why people buy laptops!
I do. Even for light work basic iGPU is more than enough. These iGPU's are for gaming.
That's what I said! So you obviously don't read (or at least understand) my posts. They CANNOT do heavy-duty gaming... that's what a dGPU is for...
This I agree, however also iGPU is 50% slower on 6600. That even more illustrates these GPU's are overkill outside gaming.
Again... that's what I said!!!
For desktop replacement yes but something else not so.
For something else, you don't need the 6900!!!! That's the entire point I have been trying to say!!
What is this "light work"? For "light work" even Intel's lowest end iGPU is more than enough. Sure there are certain scenarios where beefier iGPU is needed but basically it's either gaming or casual use. These are overkill for casual use.
I already told you this... light work: surfing, email, youtube, etc... the thing that 90% of laptop users want their device for...

The niche that the 6900 was meant to fill was the desktop replacement area - but Alder Lake turned out to outperform it... making it a foolish purchase.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
But even a light desktop is a PAIN to travel with... you need a monitor, keyboard, mouse... not to mention power cords and stuff... it's why people buy laptops!
Most people I know do not carry around laptops. They use phone instead.
That's what I said! So you obviously don't read (or at least understand) my posts. They CANNOT do heavy-duty gaming... that's what a dGPU is for...
Not heavy duty but mid duty. Again, there is absolutely no sense to put high end iGPU with external GPU. This is very rarely seen on desktops because it makes no sense.
For something else, you don't need the 6900!!!! That's the entire point I have been trying to say!!
And I have been saying 6900 is for those who want gaming with battery but of course it also means sacrificing some performance.
I already told you this... light work: surfing, email, youtube, etc... the thing that 90% of laptop users want their device for...

The niche that the 6900 was meant to fill was the desktop replacement area - but Alder Lake turned out to outperform it... making it a foolish purchase.
If 6900 was meant to be desktop replacement, then it would also have much weaker iGPU and more CPU cores. It's meant to be light portable that is still able to play games even on battery. And on that use it smokes Alder Lake.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 5,335   +4,980
Most people I know do not carry around laptops. They use phone instead.

Not heavy duty but mid duty. Again, there is absolutely no sense to put high end iGPU with external GPU. This is very rarely seen on desktops because it makes no sense.

And I have been saying 6900 is for those who want gaming with battery but of course it also means sacrificing some performance.

If 6900 was meant to be desktop replacement, then it would also have much weaker iGPU and more CPU cores. It's meant to be light portable that is still able to play games even on battery. And on that use it smokes Alder Lake.
Wow... like arguing with a brick wall...I'm done with you...
 

smartroad

Posts: 35   +23
Out of interest can the USB4 do eGPU? Isn't it meant to be the same tech as thunderbolt but without the Intel branding?
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,321
Out of interest can the USB4 do eGPU? Isn't it meant to be the same tech as thunderbolt but without the Intel branding?
Basically USB 4.0 and Thunderbolt are same thing, Intel just refines what Thunderbolt 4 must be and it's basically same as USB 4.0.

Even without Thunderbolt, USB 4.0 could do eGPU if supported.
 

rmcrys

Posts: 153   +131
When you pay top dollar for a laptop (and since this is AMD's fastest mobile CPU, expect to be paying that for anything which includes it), you will be using it for intensive projects - be they CAD, gaming, etc... Those intense projects will usually be performed PLUGGED IN

When you are performing "light tasks" - like checking email at the cafeteria or browsing YouTube, etc... then you are using your battery - and don't need to use your dGPU...

So, you have to understand that there are tons of apps that use CPU and just some GPU. Like Apple M1, the GPU is like a gtx 1050 ti but editing video, some 3D it is very fast; the CPU is also optimized and programming, web, office etc is very fast. All this with good battery. If you put an rtx 3090 only in idly you will double the consumption