Intel launches Tiger Lake CPUs with Xe graphics for laptops, aims higher than Ryzen 4000

[Puiu]

You can buy an 8 core Intel atom that will get destroyed in multicore tests by a 2 core i3. Just because a CPU has more cores doesn’t mean it’s better. I mean the CPU in question is from AMD, with their track record it’s probably actually just a quad core anyway!

You are comparing oranges to apples. The 4800U in not an 2012 Atom CPU from a netbook.

You've clearly fallen behind times with what AMD has been doing with the 4000 series in laptops. With the exception of some games (when using the same dedicated GPU), AMD draws much less power than the 10th gen Intel CPUs and has higher performance.

It's impossible for the 4 core 11th gen Intel CPUs to outperform them in multi-threaded workloads like rendering when the 8 core 10th H gens can't. Benchmarks show that the 4800U is on par with the 8 core Core i7-10875H in multithreading tasks.

Hell, it won't even beat the 4500U which is a 6 core CPU:

AMD Ryzen 5 4500U Review

This is our first review of AMD's Ryzen Mobile 4000 U-series processors, the low power variants intended for slim, light, ultraportable laptops. Our exploration starts with the mid-range Ryzen...

www.techspot.com

 

[Shadowboxer]

That sounds like niche case scenario but even if not and you don't get the full 28W TDP for extended periods you won't get anything near 20% improvement.

Yeah it is a niche case I guess. I was just trying to make the point that a lot of “office productivity” can benefit from extra CPU power. Yes, Office365 doesn’t really need much but not everyone in an office is using a word processor. Many cases will be “niche cases”

And I’m going to wait till benchmarks actually come in before assuming anything about the performance, the extra TDP etc like you have.

If this chip is faster than a 4800 then that’s impressive and Intel should be commended.

 

[fps4ever]

Yeah it is a niche case I guess. I was just trying to make the point that a lot of “office productivity” can benefit from extra CPU power. Yes, Office365 doesn’t really need much but not everyone in an office is using a word processor. Many cases will be “niche cases”

And I’m going to wait till benchmarks actually come in before assuming anything about the performance, the extra TDP etc like you have.

If this chip is faster than a 4800 then that’s impressive and Intel should be commended.

Nowhere was I disagreeing with any of that except for the claim of 20% office productivity improvement. Except for the many niche cases, but then that would make that generalized statement false. And I wasn't dishing Intel, it is the OEM's that cripple configurable TDP cpus towards the lower end of that range for cost and cooling reasons. They have also done that to AMD as well.

 

[Evernessince]

You do realise that this is only their U and Y lineup meant for lightweight notebooks. Their mainstream H-series is due for Q1 2021 which will indeed have up to 8 cores according to leaks.

It's a fair critique given that AMD offers 8 core u series CPUs.

The 4800U's boost clocks of 4.3ghz drops down to 2.3ghz after sustained multithreaded workloads (not exactly a surprise) because of the scuffed power limits. The 1185g7 demolishes the 4800u in single threaded tasks, and is just as fast in multithreaded ones, while having half the cores. Not to mention the 50-100% faster iGPU matching MX 350 levels of performance, it's obvious that we already have a winner here.

1) There are no independent benchmarks for the 1185g7. https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-1185G7-Processor-Benchmarks-and-Specs.467757.0.html

2) I'm pretty sure the performance drop you are referencing is due to throttling, not power constraints. These chips are being placed in ultra-portable designs with cheaper cooling solutions than the Intel equivalent part. There are pretty well noted instances of this in the community. Not that this changes the outcome, the 4800U is still far more performant at multi-threading, far more power efficient, and has near equal single threaded performance.

Well in my case we use a network imaging software that scans nodes, routers and models and builds an image of the network you’re looking at. It can take quite a while for it to get through that data and seems to be at 100% usage in my CPU when I do it. I wouldn’t mind 20% being lopped off that time.

You'd want the AMD CPU then.

 

[badger]

You are making some really weird claims without actually seeing any real benchmarks. You don't even know at what power limits the tests were made by Intel.

Just as fast in multithreaded? That's just wishful thinking, we are talking about 4 vs 8 cores here. Even Intel didn't dare show such benchmarks.

All of my "claims" are based on actual benchmarks from geekbench and cinebench. The 1165G7(4c/8t) is merely 3% behind the 4700u(8c/16t) in cinebench r20 multi-core. If only you would just do actual research before pretending that 4500u even compares to the TGL i7s.
Also, all of Intel's benchmarks of the 1185G7 from the presentation were on a 28W power limit.

 

[Arbie]

I mean the CPU in question is from AMD, with their track record it’s probably actually just a quad core anyway!

So you conjure AMD's ancient, failed Bulldozer cores into a "track record". More sleight-of-hand. Meanwhile, Intel regularly engages in far shadier stunts and you don't blink an eye!

If you find AMD's record of solid delivery as promised since 2017 to be "poor", then you must think Intel's is beneath mention. Maybe that's why you don't mention it.

Breathtakingly one-sided commentary. Guaranteed to amaze.

 

[Irata]

All of my "claims" are based on actual benchmarks from geekbench and cinebench. The 1165G7(4c/8t) is merely 3% behind the 4700u(8c/16t) in cinebench r20 multi-core. If only you would just do actual research before pretending that 4500u even compares to the TGL i7s.
Also, all of Intel's benchmarks of the 1185G7 from the presentation were on a 28W power limit.

You ran those benchmarks I assume because to my knowledge, there have been no independent TGL benchmarks yet.

Techspot reviewed the 4500u and at 19W, it scores 2305 in CB20 multicore vs. 1654 for the i7-1065G7 at 25W. That‘s the top of the line Ice Lake model and the 4500U is 39% faster at a lower wattage. Ice Lake is even behind on single core.

So you think TGL is more than 40% faster in multicore than ICL ?

 

[quadibloc]

Intel is on record at investor calls that it's initial 10nm tech will have worse performance characteristics than it's 14nm+++++.

Yes, but this isn't Intel's initial 10nm tech. It's the SuperFin tech which they decided was too good to be called 10nm+, and it is supposed to be better than their 14nm, even with all the pluses.

 

[mattferg]

Literally the worst time for me to buy a laptop for work right now.

Intel's current stuff sucks, but is in everything
Their new stuff might be ok, but isn't out yet.
AMD's stuff is great but is only in mid-tier laptops.
Apple is about to change their entire lineup, ARM might be great or might be a flop.

But my current 7700HQ+1060 isn't fast enough for what I need to do :S

 

[Evernessince]

Yes, but this isn't Intel's initial 10nm tech. It's the SuperFin tech which they decided was too good to be called 10nm+, and it is supposed to be better than their 14nm, even with all the pluses.

According to the AnandTech write-up, it's because Intel wanted to change the nomenclature: https://www.anandtech.com/show/1597...-soc-detailed-superfin-willow-cove-and-xelp/2

It looks good on paper, it should result in a processes better than 14nm+++. I guess we'll find out with reviews.

 

[Aryassen]

The new product line does sound promising, however, I have to agree with Stve (from GN, sorry) that it would have been better to see how the new generation compares to the predecessor (and not to the competitors, or "imitators" as Intel put it (no comment on that)).

My personal reason is: if compared to their own (former) products, I see a bigger chance for "fair comparison" and similar conditions (like using the same TDP for instance), and also, it would be a better basis for positioning right (we already have lots of independent and reliable tests about the previous gen, which could be used as a yardstick).

Now we will just have to wait for the independent reviews (as always, I guess)...

 

[jpuroila]

Yes, but this isn't Intel's initial 10nm tech. It's the SuperFin tech which they decided was too good to be called 10nm+, and it is supposed to be better than their 14nm, even with all the pluses.

Technically Ice Lake is manufactured on 10nm+, it's just that their initial 10nm process was a total disaster so Intel would rather everyone pretended that Ice Lake is made on first gen 10nm process.

 

[Shadowboxer]

So you conjure AMD's ancient, failed Bulldozer cores into a "track record". More sleight-of-hand. Meanwhile, Intel regularly engages in far shadier stunts and you don't blink an eye!

If you find AMD's record of solid delivery as promised since 2017 to be "poor", then you must think Intel's is beneath mention. Maybe that's why you don't mention it.

Breathtakingly one-sided commentary. Guaranteed to amaze.

So, nobody can make a joke at AMDs expense without mentioning Intel?

 

[Markoni35]

Intel's naming convention is so "ingenious". Some people may opt for Ryzen just because they can't read the Intel's CPU name. I mean.... i3-1125G4.... sounds like something a German U-bot would send to the central command during WW-II.

 

[badger]

You ran those benchmarks I assume because to my knowledge, there have been no independent TGL benchmarks yet.

Techspot reviewed the 4500u and at 19W, it scores 2305 in CB20 multicore vs. 1654 for the i7-1065G7 at 25W. That‘s the top of the line Ice Lake model and the 4500U is 39% faster at a lower wattage. Ice Lake is even behind on single core.

So you think TGL is more than 40% faster in multicore than ICL ?

"because to my knowledge, there have been no independent TGL benchmarks yet." Yeah, your "knowledge" is erroneous. ?‍

"In the CB20 multi-core test, the Core i7-1165G7 manages to come within 3% of the Ryzen 7 4700U and the Core i7-10710U while securing a comfortable 16% lead over the Ryzen 5 4500U. The Core i5-1135G7 also seems to offer excellent multi-core performance and is nearly 65% faster than the Core i5-1035G7."
Source - https://www.notebookcheck.net/All-c...liminary-performance-comparison.490934.0.html

 

[Irata]

"because to my knowledge, there have been no independent TGL benchmarks yet." Yeah, your "knowledge" is erroneous. ?‍

"In the CB20 multi-core test, the Core i7-1165G7 manages to come within 3% of the Ryzen 7 4700U and the Core i7-10710U while securing a comfortable 16% lead over the Ryzen 5 4500U. The Core i5-1135G7 also seems to offer excellent multi-core performance and is nearly 65% faster than the Core i5-1035G7."
Source - https://www.notebookcheck.net/All-c...liminary-performance-comparison.490934.0.html

Techspot CB 20 multi for the 4500U:
2305 @19W
2458 @26W

Notebookcheck lists 2173 for the 4500u.

Also:

Do note that these results are from pre-release Tiger Lake-powered laptops and provided by our sources.

Third party independent review is something different.

Either way, we‘ll see proper reviews in due time, so why worry too much now ?

 

[kwc813]

Wait for independent specs. And seriously? Price/performance. Their 10nm is reportedly an actual step down from existing dies if the news is correct. I don't see a line to buy Intel stock anytime soon. I really DO hope they get it together quicker rather than later though...before I sell mine.

 

[poohbear]

There is no reason to not offer 6 or 8 ores in an U series CPU unless it's not technically viable with the current process node and architecture (although they are using their new enhanced 10nm process node). The 4800U is an 8 core / 16threads CPU used in the same class of ultrabooks.

well, to be honest, for what most people use a thin and light laptop for, 4 cores and 8 threads @ 4.3ghz is pretty dope.

 

[Puiu]

well, to be honest, for what most people use a thin and light laptop for, 4 cores and 8 threads @ 4.8ghz is pretty dope.

But we do need high core counts to be present at least at the high end side of ultrabooks. Moving away from 4 cores is the only way to speed-up the transition of the software to proper multithreading and even in such form factors high core counts can be used by people today. Intel needs to stop dragging its feet.

 

[Irata]

well, to be honest, for what most people use a thin and light laptop for, 4 cores and 8 threads @ 4.8ghz is pretty dope.

Looking at Techspot‘s / Hardware Unboxed‘s review of Lenovo‘s 4800u thin and light, 8C16T seem even more dope.

 

[poohbear]

Looking at Techspot‘s / Hardware Unboxed‘s review of Lenovo‘s 4800u thin and light, 8C16T seem even more dope.

I'd gladly buy an AMD laptop, but the problem is they don't have any in the mid-range or even high-end. All the AMD laptops are lower end with lower end specs/qualities. No high quality screen, light weight, or extended battery life version. I wish AMD really pushed their partners to get more of them out. The vast majority of laptops are Intel. Where's the Acer swift 5-- AMD version? The Dell XPS13-- AMD version? The AMD versions they do have are relegated to their low end "budget" offerings...no one's making any premium "Ultra books" with AMD in em, and that really needs to change.

 

[Puiu]

I'd gladly buy an AMD laptop, but the problem is they don't have any in the mid-range or even high-end. All the AMD laptops are lower end with lower end specs/qualities. No high quality screen, light weight, or extended battery life version. I wish AMD really pushed their partners to get more of them out. The vast majority of laptops are Intel. Where's the Acer swift 5-- AMD version? The Dell XPS13-- AMD version? The AMD versions they do have are relegated to their low end "budget" offerings...no one's making any premium "Ultra books" with AMD in em, and that really needs to change.

There have been many sings that Intel and OEMs are doing some shady backdoor deals. It's just too obvious.

 

[Irata]

I'd gladly buy an AMD laptop, but the problem is they don't have any in the mid-range or even high-end. All the AMD laptops are lower end with lower end specs/qualities. No high quality screen, light weight, or extended battery life version. I wish AMD really pushed their partners to get more of them out. The vast majority of laptops are Intel. Where's the Acer swift 5-- AMD version? The Dell XPS13-- AMD version? The AMD versions they do have are relegated to their low end "budget" offerings...no one's making any premium "Ultra books" with AMD in em, and that really needs to change.

The Lenovo Yoga 7 slim sounds like a decent upper mid range Renoir based notebook.

I admit, pickings are slim on the higher end. Don‘t even know if any model with an OLED or 4k display is available. Things are getting better but still not where they should be.

Case in point is I just went to Lenovo‘s web site to look for their AMD offering. When you apply the filter for CPU selection, you have all the series for Intel (Celeron, i3, i5....) and for AMD you have one selection - „AMD“.... ?‍

Edit: Seems like Lenovo will release a Pro Model with the 4900H and better screen options:

Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 Pro combines AMD Ryzen 9 4900H with 14 inch 16:10 screen

Like Dell with the XPS line, Lenovo embraces the 16:10 aspect ratio. The upcoming Lenovo Yoga 7 Pro features the taller screen ratio with a new 14 inch display, combining it with the most powerful AMD laptop processor: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900H.

www.notebookcheck.net

 

[Makste]

That will be the "i9" version I'm sure. And it will be the best cores ever. They're making cores great again. In fact, it will beat the zen 3 by the biglyest amount in the history of bigly.

I want to remember this when this happens

 

[Puiu]

The Lenovo Yoga 7 slim sounds like a decent upper mid range Renoir based notebook.

I admit, pickings are slim on the higher end. Don‘t even know if any model with an OLED or 4k display is available. Things are getting better but still not where they should be.

Case in point is I just went to Lenovo‘s web site to look for their AMD offering. When you apply the filter for CPU selection, you have all the series for Intel (Celeron, i3, i5....) and for AMD you have one selection - „AMD“.... ?‍♂

Edit: Seems like Lenovo will release a Pro Model with the 4900H and better screen options:

Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 Pro combines AMD Ryzen 9 4900H with 14 inch 16:10 screen

Like Dell with the XPS line, Lenovo embraces the 16:10 aspect ratio. The upcoming Lenovo Yoga 7 Pro features the taller screen ratio with a new 14 inch display, combining it with the most powerful AMD laptop processor: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900H.

www.notebookcheck.net

It looks great for an ultrabook, but I'm still waiting for a more reasonable normal laptop that I can work on and do a bit of gaming. All I want is an acceptable 90Hz IPS screen (QHD) and something a bit better than a RTX 2060 (2070 maybe).