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

Status
Not open for further replies.
ive got an i5 based laptop here that can only do 720p low/laptop mode at 45-50fps...
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Sure; but like I said, it's a tiny niche. It'd certainly be nice if that weren't the case, and AMD could possibly do an 'Iris Pro' thing and put some external cache on-package to help with very limited bandwidth of CPU memory, but that just increases the bill of materials more toward the price of including a far superior discrete GPU over an anemic discrete GPU or none at all.

Really, if they can get some good memory speeds on the APUs, they should be decent, and since Ryzen is more than 'close enough' for most users' use cases, AMD might find a decent market.


[on balance, I can play stuff like League of Legends on my i7-7500U ultrabook, which is Intel dual-core, at a solid 60FPS at 1080p if I bury the settings- so the mobile Intel graphics might very well be 'enough' for many, and we can reasonably expect Intel's mobile CPUs to remain both faster and have better battery life next to AMD's first mobile Ryzen/Vega APU release]
Click to expand...
Which makes me think AMD should encourage OEMs to work with Nvidia for discrete solutions. Once AMD has a presence again, Nvidia graphics as well, no reason why RyZen CPUs (mobile orientated which I don't see) with like 6 cores 12 threads and high end Nvidia Mobile GPUs are used. Even eight core ones except Coffee Lake would also compete well there. Until RTG has power efficient competitive GPUs, AMD should work with Nvidia is the bottom line. Sell sell sell what will sell.
 
atmartens said:
For 15 W, in a sub $1000 computer, that's outstanding.
Click to expand...

Ehh. Regardless of how power efficient it is it's still pretty much useless for gaming. It will make a fine ultrabook APU for tooling around on the internet and other light tasks but it's not going to give you very passable performance in real games. It's like those scooters that are advertised as getting 100mpg; sure they're great for driving down to the corner to get some cigs but it still sucks for anything else.
 
I think this new Ryzen CPU mobile part is a great thing, especially since it probably spurred Intel into pushing quad-core CPUs down into the ultrabooks.

One of the issues with TB3 eGPUs is the CPU overhead requirement. Now we got quad cores pushing turbos in the mid-3ghz range, in Ultrabooks. Not too long ago, to get that kind of processing power required a lot more than 15w - my i7-4800MQ, which is no slouch, will have a real power draw of 60w to hold a 3.7ghz turbo, or about 30-40w @ 3ghz. Now we have desktop 4-core cpus with about 45w real draw (i3-8xx0 parts). So getting this kind of performance, for only 15w is big.

While the iGPU isn't too impressive, I think we're probably still a few generations away from getting truly powerful GPUs into a laptop for sustained gaming - how much does a GTX 1070 mobile part draw? 100w? That's 2/3rds of a desktop part. Even if you go with a more modest 1060 part, you're still at about 60-75w, which is half of the desktop part.
 
ZiggyDeath said:
I think this new Ryzen CPU mobile part is a great thing, especially since it probably spurred Intel into pushing quad-core CPUs down into the ultrabooks.

One of the issues with TB3 eGPUs is the CPU overhead requirement. Now we got quad cores pushing turbos in the mid-3ghz range, in Ultrabooks. Not too long ago, to get that kind of processing power required a lot more than 15w - my i7-4800MQ, which is no slouch, will have a real power draw of 60w to hold a 3.7ghz turbo, or about 30-40w @ 3ghz. Now we have desktop 4-core cpus with about 45w real draw (i3-8xx0 parts). So getting this kind of performance, for only 15w is big.

While the iGPU isn't too impressive, I think we're probably still a few generations away from getting truly powerful GPUs into a laptop for sustained gaming - how much does a GTX 1070 mobile part draw? 100w? That's 2/3rds of a desktop part. Even if you go with a more modest 1060 part, you're still at about 60-75w, which is half of the desktop part.
Click to expand...

very doubtful.. all their ultrabook processors are dual core with or without hyperthreading.. the only difference between i5u and i7u is the clock speeds.. it's the only way they can stay within the 15w power requirement for the i7u's. i don't think it would be worth having 4 real cores at half the clock speeds just to get that 15w.
 
On one corner of a critic's mouth, it is said this APU is unnecessary and an Intel iGPU works just fine. On the other side, this APU will be totally inadequate.

This APU will fill a large gap for those that don't need a laptop dedicated to gaming and want video performance superior to an iGPU.

This seems difficult for many here to understand. Especially when the price for these APUs are this reasonable.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
very doubtful.. all their ultrabook processors are dual core with or without hyperthreading.. the only difference between i5u and i7u is the clock speeds.. it's the only way they can stay within the 15w power requirement for the i7u's. i don't think it would be worth having 4 real cores at half the clock speeds just to get that 15w.
Click to expand...

Bro, Intel is rolling 4C8T into Ultrabooks as we speak.

I still don't know if it's a good idea, but they're doing it. I'm looking forward to the reviews.
 
Nightfire said:
On one corner of a critic's mouth, it is said this APU is unnecessary and an Intel iGPU works just fine. On the other side, this APU will be totally inadequate.

This APU will fill a large gap for those that don't need a laptop dedicated to gaming and want video performance superior to an iGPU.

This seems difficult for many here to understand. Especially when the price for these APUs are this reasonable.
Click to expand...

The point is that the niche where an APU with a slower CPU portion makes sense is very small.
 
Slower than what exactly? The CPU specs seem plenty adequate, especially for an ultrabook and not some clunky gaming laptop. I think you may be trying a bit to hard to discredit this APU.
 
Nightfire said:
Slower than what exactly? The CPU specs seem plenty adequate, especially for an ultrabook and not some clunky gaming laptop. I think you may be trying a bit to hard to discredit this APU.
Click to expand...

I think you may be trying a bit hard to promote this APU outside of mass-market use cases.

I expect the CPU portion to be slower than Intel parts watt for watt, and to have more battery usage and thus less battery life. Mobile is where Intel has put much of their development emphasis, and it would be unreasonable for us to expect AMD to have caught up completely here with their first try.

That said, when competing on price, I do expect AMD to be competitive, just as they are on the desktop today.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
very doubtful.. all their ultrabook processors are dual core with or without hyperthreading.. the only difference between i5u and i7u is the clock speeds.. it's the only way they can stay within the 15w power requirement for the i7u's. i don't think it would be worth having 4 real cores at half the clock speeds just to get that 15w.
Click to expand...

i5u and i7u 15w TDPs in the 8xx0 series are all 4c/8t AFAIK, with base clocks ranging from 1.6-1.9 with turbos of 3.6-4.2.

So basically core clocks have dropped by about 1ghz, but turbos are far more aggressive, at about ~700mhz more on average, with 2 more cores when compared to the 7xx0u series.

These Ryzens are basically in the same ballpark clock wise. This is great news. Even for short spurts, we're basically getting last generation desktop class performance.
 
Last edited:
ZiggyDeath said:
i5u and i7u 15w TDPs in the 8xx0 series are all 4c/8t AFAIK, with base clocks ranging from 1.6-1.9 with turbos of 3.6-4.2.

So basically core clocks have dropped by about 1ghz, but turbos are far more aggressive, at about ~700mhz more on average, with 2 more cores when compared to the 7xx0u series.

These Ryzens are basically in the same ballpark clock wise. This is great news. Even for short spurts, we're basically getting last generation desktop class performance.
Click to expand...

Guessed right then.. I hadn't looked at the 8th gen stuff since I just bought a 7th gen based laptop so I didn't know they were doing 4/8c's. But I'll pass on those low non turbo clocks. Mine rarely ever goes into turbo clocks as it is. But I'd rather have the apu over the 950m in mine.
 
ZiggyDeath said:
I think this new Ryzen CPU mobile part is a great thing, especially since it probably spurred Intel into pushing quad-core CPUs down into the ultrabooks.
Click to expand...

sirmonkey1985 said:
very doubtful.. all their ultrabook processors are dual core with or without hyperthreading.. the only difference between i5u and i7u is the clock speeds.. it's the only way they can stay within the 15w power requirement for the i7u's. i don't think it would be worth having 4 real cores at half the clock speeds just to get that 15w.
Click to expand...

What happened to the i7-8650U, i7-8550U, i5-8350U, and i5-8250U models introduced several months ago? All them are 4-core 15W chips.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1500-intel-8th-gen-core-quad-core-ultrabooks/page7.html

https://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/laptops/dell-xps-13
 
gigaxtreme1 said:
NVMe is basically SSD without the case and a faster interface.
Click to expand...
But is more expensive and generates more heat. I understand the performance is there, but there's a cost; plus IMO HDD->SSD is wicked fast, I highly doubt the SSD->NVMe improvement is as noticable (haven't tested myself, but based on everything I've read I have my doubts)
 
If you opted for the spinning disk, odds are you'll be able to replace it with a regular 2.5" SSD. I've done a few swaps before in last gen x360's.
 
Napoleon said:
But is more expensive and generates more heat. I understand the performance is there, but there's a cost; plus IMO HDD->SSD is wicked fast, I highly doubt the SSD->NVMe improvement is as noticable (haven't tested myself, but based on everything I've read I have my doubts)
Click to expand...

If you don't like it ---------------> DIY Upgrade
 
I will be in the market for one of the 2700u equipped laptops with 2400mhz ram if/when they're released.
 
Napoleon said:
But is more expensive and generates more heat. I understand the performance is there, but there's a cost; plus IMO HDD->SSD is wicked fast, I highly doubt the SSD->NVMe improvement is as noticable (haven't tested myself, but based on everything I've read I have my doubts)
Click to expand...
Definitely incremental experience upgrade, I find it only really noticeable when doing large transfers or long sustained loads.

However there is a benefit to going NVMe, your 2.5" bay is now free. Sometimes retailers offer NVMe drives from Samsung's OEM line, which is substantially cheaper than buying one yourself.

Looking at the HP system, seems like it might be using Intel 600 series, which is not exactly a drive worthy of the NVMe interface. In this case definitely DIY.
 
Someone reported earlier it was shipping on 11-17. Ship date has been pushed out to 11-23 unless preorder depleted the original allotment.
 
i wish i had some numbers where they fall in comparison to say a intel 7700 HQ and a 1050ti or 1060
 
Lunas said:
i wish i had some numbers where they fall in comparison to say a intel 7700 HQ and a 1050ti or 1060
Click to expand...

That would be... unfair.

It's not a bad thing to ask for, but you're not going to get the performance out of a higher wattage Intel quad from the new lower wattage Intel quads in ultrabooks, and the AMD part will be similarly hampered.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
That would be... unfair.

It's not a bad thing to ask for, but you're not going to get the performance out of a higher wattage Intel quad from the new lower wattage Intel quads in ultrabooks, and the AMD part will be similarly hampered.
Click to expand...
Well here is what i want a laptop under 6-7 lbs 800$ or less with a cpu better than my rigs in my sig with a dgpu that is on par with a 1050ti or 1060 and i want the laptop to not have gimped cooling to the point it thermal throttles on ms paint like my current laptop...

I have been eyeing Sager/clevo notebooks with the i7 7700HQ and the 1050ti or 1060 more preferable... the laptop i have had my eye on has been 799-850...
 
I used to have an A10 APU and it was good enough to play older games, but I ended up getting rid of it for a gaming desktop and a smaller 13" laptop.
 
Lunas said:
Well here is what i want a laptop under 6-7 lbs 800$ or less with a cpu better than my rigs in my sig with a dgpu that is on par with a 1050ti or 1060 and i want the laptop to not have gimped cooling to the point it thermal throttles on ms paint like my current laptop...

I have been eyeing Sager/clevo notebooks with the i7 7700HQ and the 1050ti or 1060 more preferable... the laptop i have had my eye on has been 799-850...
Click to expand...

These will give you your wish on the cpu front, but not the gpu from the benches I've seen. They appear to be on par with a discrete 940m or similar gpu wise, but cpu wise are not as clock hampered as their intel counterparts.
 
bobzdar said:
These will give you your wish on the cpu front, but not the gpu from the benches I've seen. They appear to be on par with a discrete 940m or similar gpu wise, but cpu wise are not as clock hampered as their intel counterparts.
Click to expand...
My other issue with my current setup is the way amd handles the dgpu it has improved greatly since i got this thing but the main card will never be the dgpu it is always the igpu unless specfic applications typically games are running but then i would say the biggest thing that holds it back is the over heating and thermal throttling if lenovo had put just a little more into the thermal management my laptop would be a little beast... My next one i want to get one with the power to play and the cooling to run well...
 
Lunas said:
My other issue with my current setup is the way amd handles the dgpu it has improved greatly since i got this thing but the main card will never be the dgpu it is always the igpu unless specfic applications typically games are running but then i would say the biggest thing that holds it back is the over heating and thermal throttling if lenovo had put just a little more into the thermal management my laptop would be a little beast... My next one i want to get one with the power to play and the cooling to run well...
Click to expand...

You're going to have to go with a dedicated 'gaming' laptop- these Ryzen/Vega APUs are low power parts meant for ultrabooks, which are always thermally limited.

That's not to say that AMD won't have some high-power parts coming, but the reality is that any APU that doesn't have an HBM stack like the new Intel part will be extremely underpowered by design when compared to a separate CPU + GPU pair.
 
I agree. AMD underestimates the demand APUs with HBM2 stack on package will have. This first BGA package may be the test market for extreme low power, but if Intel's variant has hbm2 Ryzen APU should too.
 
gigaxtreme1 said:
I agree. AMD underestimates the demand APUs with HBM2 stack on package will have. This first BGA package may be the test market for extreme low power, but if Intel's variant has hbm2 Ryzen APU should too.
Click to expand...
But the second they put an apu with hbm out that is when the gold standard for mobile and the low end is set it would eliminate any choices below that from viability... Why run any intel apu when the amd solution gives such a better performance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top