AMD launches Ryzen Mobile 7 2700U & 5 2500U with Vega Graphics

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

_mockingbird

Gawd
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
992
AMD Ryzen Processor with Radeon Vega Graphics — World’s Fastest Processor for Ultrathin Notebooks
WE BEAT THOSE TARGETS
  • First “Zen”-Base APU
  • High-Performance On-Die “Vega”-Base Graphics
  • Long Battery Life Premium Form Factors
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U vs 7th Gen APU

  • CPU Performance: up to 200% More CPU Performance
  • GPU Performance: Up to 128% More GPU Performance
  • Power: Up to 58% less power
Great Mobile Experiences Ryzen Processor with Radeon Vega Graphics
  • Powerful Performer
  • Completely Entertaining
  • Efficiency Designed
NEW Precision Boost 2 in AMD SenseMI Technology
  • New opportunistic algorithm
  • Retires “2-core” v. “all-core” boost
  • Governed by CPU temperatures, current, load
  • Seeks highest possible frequency from environmental inputs, graceful roll off
  • Opens new boost opportunities for real world nT workloads (e.g. games)
  • 25 MHz granularity
NEW Mobile XFR (mXFR) in AMD SenseMI Technology
  • Raises sustained clock speeds in premium notebooks with great cooling solutions
  • Leverages temperature awareness of Precision Boost 2
  • Fully automatic, no user input required
  • Notebook must meet AMD performance criteria to offer mXFR
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U (with mXFR) vs AMD Ryzen 7 2700U (without mXFR): ~23% better
 
Last edited:
_mockingbird said:
Unfortunately, I think only the mobile processor is being released this year.
Click to expand...

yeah i figured that, i've pretty much been looking at hopefully jan or feb for RR on the desktop parts given some of the information that's been going around that a few of the board manufactures are rewriting their UEFI bios from the ground up to make it easier to support RR, ryzen refresh and zen 2.
 
So are these mobile processors and RR APUs Pinnacle Ridge based? The reason I ask that is because of the '2700U' name and Precision Boost 2 technology.

Also, what happened to Shintai?
 
Could be a good htpc build, when the desktop variants come out. I could relegate my server back to just server duties instead of the dual function it serves now, and pick up h265 decoding for my media library.
 
012582_hp.jpg


012581_lenovo.jpg


012580_acer.jpg


Totally stolen from hardware.info , sadly the introduction is only in Dutch ..
 
Interested in the HP Laptop. I hope they get an Elitebook soon. I'm confused about the "up to 8GB" though. Maybe largest size sticks are 8GB for 16GB total.
 
Lets wait for benchmarks. Especially in mobile, OEM designs are gonna determine if Ryzen really will compete with Intel. If they all decide to handicap Ryzen in the design department, these pretty benchmarks will mean nothing.
 
SighTurtle said:
Lets wait for benchmarks. Especially in mobile, OEM designs are gonna determine if Ryzen really will compete with Intel. If they all decide to handicap Ryzen in the design department, these pretty benchmarks will mean nothing.
Click to expand...

Well if Intel are still paying OEM enough they can,
 
$699. Thats nice. I know these can be taken apart pretty easily, I wonder if it will support 8x2 RAM config...
 
I can't wait to. See what these things can do given a desktop/NUC type of setup.

The 1080p gaming numbers are certainly more impressive than even the desktop APUs of yore.
 
I hate that the call these R7 and R5 parts despite being a 4/8 config. They should be called R3+ or something. NVidia, Intel, and AMD are all guilty of this mobile naming misrepresentation.

One slide shows a CB score of 550 with XFR while another shows over 700. Sort of confused on that.

In any case, the Ryzen will compete very well in the mobile realm against Intel. With desktops, Intel CPUs are clocked up to 4.5 Ghz in ST and 3.5 GHz+ in MT. With mobile, the practical limit seems to be 4.0 Ghz ST and 2.0-2.5 Ghz MT. Ryzen seems to be able to match these clocks. Also, SMT seems to be more effective than HT.

Performance should be close to that of a PS4 or XBOX ONE S. Good for most doing casual mobile gaming. It would be nice if we could get an desktop APU that was closer to a XBOX ONE X or PS4. Pro.
 
OrangeKhrush said:
It far exceeds what i was expecting given Shitai's earlier leak, then again it was from shintai.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting we have to trust AMD slides and don't wait to third-party reviews?

SighTurtle said:
Lets wait for benchmarks. Especially in mobile, OEM designs are gonna determine if Ryzen really will compete with Intel. If they all decide to handicap Ryzen in the design department, these pretty benchmarks will mean nothing.
Click to expand...

Like that single-channel Lenovo?

Pieter3dnow said:
Well if Intel are still paying OEM enough they can,
Click to expand...

Isn't too soon for the usual conspiracy argument?
 
Nightfire said:
I hate that the call these R7 and R5 parts despite being a 4/8 config. They should be called R3+ or something. NVidia, Intel, and AMD are all guilty of this mobile naming misrepresentation.

One slide shows a CB score of 550 with XFR while another shows over 700. Sort of confused on that.

In any case, the Ryzen will compete very well in the mobile realm against Intel. With desktops, Intel CPUs are clocked up to 4.5 Ghz in ST and 3.5 GHz+ in MT. With mobile, the practical limit seems to be 4.0 Ghz ST and 2.0-2.5 Ghz MT. Ryzen seems to be able to match these clocks. Also, SMT seems to be more effective than HT.
Click to expand...

Do you know there are KBL 4.2GHz mobile chips?

Also HT is SMT. So it is AMD's implementation of SMT vs Intel's implementation of SMT.

AMD's implementation is no "more effective". What happens is that the Zen core has lower IPC and leaves more execution units for a second thread. In the prehistory, I prepared a diagram illustrating this concept

SMT%2Bvs%2BILP.png
 
juanrga said:
Do you know there are KBL 4.2GHz mobile chips?

Also HT is SMT. So it is AMD's implementation of SMT vs Intel's implementation of SMT.

AMD's implementation is no "more effective". What happens is that the Zen core has lower IPC and leaves more execution units for a second thread. In the prehistory, I prepared a diagram illustrating this concept

SMT%2Bvs%2BILP.png
Click to expand...
BS and my god a lot of it. That is not how it works. IPC is determined by instructions per clock. IPC is then a function of code so any execution units available are because the code did not make use of them. You also have to add cache and front end mechanics ie: Instruction set decode and saving. That is why AMDs implementation curb stomps Intels. You need to read up.
 
Nightfire said:
I hate that the call these R7 and R5 parts despite being a 4/8 config. They should be called R3+ or something. NVidia, Intel, and AMD are all guilty of this mobile naming misrepresentation.

One slide shows a CB score of 550 with XFR while another shows over 700. Sort of confused on that.

In any case, the Ryzen will compete very well in the mobile realm against Intel. With desktops, Intel CPUs are clocked up to 4.5 Ghz in ST and 3.5 GHz+ in MT. With mobile, the practical limit seems to be 4.0 Ghz ST and 2.0-2.5 Ghz MT. Ryzen seems to be able to match these clocks. Also, SMT seems to be more effective than HT.

Performance should be close to that of a PS4 or XBOX ONE S. Good for most doing casual mobile gaming. It would be nice if we could get an desktop APU that was closer to a XBOX ONE X or PS4. Pro.
Click to expand...

yeah i've always hated the naming scheme in the mobile market from all companies but sadly intel has taken it to a whole new level with their "i7" U series processors still being 2 cores 4 threads. took me way to long to figure that crap out when i was looking at new laptops..

XFR is the auto overclocking function that is part of the X series desktop processors.. raven ridge is getting an updated version of it.
 
juanrga said:
Are you suggesting we have to trust AMD slides and don't wait to third-party reviews?



Like that single-channel Lenovo?



Isn't too soon for the usual conspiracy argument?
Click to expand...


Of course not, i only believe intel slides and leaks
 
JustReason said:
BS and my god a lot of it. That is not how it works. IPC is determined by instructions per clock. IPC is then a function of code so any execution units available are because the code did not make use of them. You also have to add cache and front end mechanics ie: Instruction set decode and saving. That is why AMDs implementation curb stomps Intels. You need to read up.
Click to expand...


I think what he is trying to say is that a 4.3ghz 1600 scores ~1480 to the 8700K ~1380-1400 in MT tests, or how the 3.3ghz 1700 is more or less the same score as a 4.5ghz 8700k in that domain.
 
He was calling BS on Juangra saying Intel and AMDs implementation of SMT is equally effective. As you stated, a 1600 matches or beats an 8700k clock for clock in MT tests of CB, but loses in ST tests with similiar frequencies. Thus, AMD SMT is more effective. Simple.

As for 4.2 Ghz Kaby Lake cpus, I have only seen them in fire-breathing 17" gaming rigs from MSI and ASUS. You know, the type that scream "I am a goober with no other priorities besides gaming."
 
juanrga said:
Do you know there are KBL 4.2GHz mobile chips?

Also HT is SMT. So it is AMD's implementation of SMT vs Intel's implementation of SMT.

AMD's implementation is no "more effective". What happens is that the Zen core has lower IPC and leaves more execution units for a second thread. In the prehistory, I prepared a diagram illustrating this concept
Click to expand...
Wrong, Zen core has a wider execution pipeline. It can decode 6 instructions at once while Skylake/KL/CL can only do 4. This is the reason why AMD's SMT has more throughput. AMD's implementation is absolutely more effective.
 
juanrga said:
Isn't too soon for the usual conspiracy argument?
Click to expand...

You mean a leopard can change its spots ?

ooh wait you mean https://ethisphere.com/ethisphere-a...-most-ethical-companies-celebrating-10-years/

outlining the past very well what Intel did .

these must all be wrong also :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Per... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance... https://web.archive.org/web/200701080... https://definitions.uslegal.com/d/dis... https://are.berkeley.edu/~sberto/AMDI... https://www.jftc.go.jp/eacpf/cases/in... https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/... http://ec.europa.eu/competition/secto... https://www.intel.com/pressroom/legal... http://archive.fortune.com/2009/11/13... https://www.wired.com/2009/12/ftc-sue... http://www.anandtech.com/show/386 http://www.anandtech.com/show/4122/in... https://www.extremetech.com/computing... https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_... https://www.computerbase.de/bildstrec... https://www.fool.com/investing/genera...
 
Nightfire said:
He was calling BS on Juangra saying Intel and AMDs implementation of SMT is equally effective. As you stated, a 1600 matches or beats an 8700k clock for clock in MT tests of CB, but loses in ST tests with similiar frequencies. Thus, AMD SMT is more effective. Simple.
Click to expand...

You just distilled all of the architecture differences between the two and declared that performance differences for one application are entirely due to a difference in implementation of a single feature, and that's your argument?
 
IdiotInCharge said:
You just distilled all of the architecture differences between the two and declared that performance differences for one application are entirely due to a difference in implementation of a single feature, and that's your argument?
Click to expand...

That would sound trivial but the result can be quite clear. Thought there were enough benchmarks around when you disable SMT on both cpu which lost the most is clear ?
 
Last edited:
It seems like people don't like the idea of AMD doing well, the hoops that were jumped through to defend a paper launch and spending 2.5x the MRSP price and the other shortcomings but if AMD produces what appears to be a very good ultrabook part, it is like everyone loses their shit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top