Monday, March 30th 2020

AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS Torpedoes Intel's Core i9 Mobile Lineup, Fastest Mobile Processor

by
btarunr
 Discuss (211 Comments)
Reviews of AMD's flagship mobile processor, the Ryzen 9 4900HS went live today, and the verdict is clear. Intel has lost both performance and battery-efficiency leadership over its most lucrative computing segment: mobile client computing. In a Hardware Unboxed review comparing the 4900H to Intel's current Core i9 flagship, the i9-9880H, the AMD chip at its stock 45 W TDP beats the Intel one even with the Intel chip configured to 90 W cTDP.

The 4900HS posts 11.9% higher CineBench R20 score (both chips are 8-core/16-thread) when the Intel chip is bolstered with 90 W cTDP, and a whopping 33% faster when the i9-9980H is at its stock settings, and 54% faster when its capped at 35 W cTDP. It also ends up over 150% faster than AMD's last fastest mobile processor, the 12 nm "Picasso" based Ryzen 7 3750H. The story repeats with CineBench R15 (4900H being 34% faster than stock i9-9880H), 18% faster at Handbrake HEVC, 25% faster at Blender "Classroom," and 35% faster at 7-Zip benchmark. The AMD chip lags behind by 12% in the less-parallelized Photoshop. On creativity apps that do scale with cores, such as Premiere "Warp Stabilizer 4K," the 4900HS is 12.6% faster. Gaming performance remains an even split between the two chips. Find several more interesting test results and commentary in the Hardware Unboxed presentation here. Intel has already announced a response to the 4900HS in the form of the i9-10980HK.

Related News

Add your own comment

211 Comments on AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS Torpedoes Intel's Core i9 Mobile Lineup, Fastest Mobile Processor

#2
KarymidoN
"The AMD chip at its stock 45 W TDP beats the Intel one even with the Intel chip configured to 90 W cTDP"

holy sheet waiting for more reviews but this looks bad for intel.
Posted on Reply
#3
R0H1T
The HS models have a TDP of 35W though I'm not sure if they can do "cTDP" up to 45 W, which is redundant anyway, on the other hand regular 4xxxH can be specced to do 35W in a suitable chassis.
Posted on Reply
#4
chodaboy19
Wow! mobile was intel's last bastion of performance. Intel's next gen can't come soon enough.
Posted on Reply
#5
xkm1948
This is not even Zen2 right?
Posted on Reply
#6
R0H1T
What? Of course it is o_O
Posted on Reply
#7
ppn
they configured nothing. undervolting the intel to 4.0Ghz on all cores must be doable.
Posted on Reply
#8
KarymidoN
xkm1948This is not even Zen2 right?
It is in fact ZEN 2
Posted on Reply
#9
xkm1948
KarymidoNIt is in fact ZEN 2
Nvm then!
Posted on Reply
#10
R0H1T
ppnthey configured nothing. undervolting the intel to 4.0Ghz on all cores must be doable.
Newsflash, UV on Intel is nuked with latest ucode updates probably across the board.
Posted on Reply
#11
londiste
Since 35W keeps getting emphasized, AMD takes further pages out of Intel's playbook:
As for clock speeds and boost behavior, let’s take a look. From a cold start in our Handbrake AVX workload, the Ryzen 9 4900HS consistently boosted up to around 65W of power for a few seconds achieving 4 GHz boost clocks all core, before dropping down to 54W for a longer sustained period, with clocks around 3.7 GHz. Eventually the CPU settles down to 35W to provide 3.2 GHz all-core, just above this processor’s 3.0 GHz base clock. The boost period can vary depending on how warm the system is, but from a cold start we were generally seeing at least 2 minutes of ~53W boost which is generous.
Posted on Reply
#12
notb
I wonder if this sudden surge of enthusiast-favourite CPU brand will make reviewers learn how to test laptops.

At very least, they could say which laptop is used with each CPU.
It's certainly not in the text:
www.techspot.com/review/2003-amd-ryzen-4000
Youtube video description says which laptops were used, but without the CPU info...
R0H1TThe HS models have a TDP of 35W though I'm not sure if they can do "cTDP" up to 45 W, which is redundant anyway, on the other hand regular 4xxxH can be specced to do 35W in a suitable chassis.
Here's your 35W:
Posted on Reply
#13
R0H1T
londisteSince 35W keeps getting emphasized, AMD takes further pages out of Intel's playbook:
PL1 & PL2 limits on notebook are well known, otherwise 5.3GHz on any notebook chip would be nigh impossible! Basically the chip has to boost above their "TDP" limit for short periods especially to allow for high ST performance.
notbHere's your 35W:
Ok, your point?
Posted on Reply
#14
londiste
xkm1948This is not even Zen2 right?
Zen2 vs Zen+, 4900HS vs 3750H:
Posted on Reply
#15
EarthDog
londisteZen2 vs Zen+, 4900HS vs 3750H:
New instruction sets FTW...?
Posted on Reply
#16
londiste
EarthDogNew instruction sets FTW...?
Not instruction sets. 4 additional cores, AVX2 and 7nm.
Posted on Reply
#18
EarthDog
londisteNot instruction sets. 4 additional cores, AVX2 and 7nm.
Isn't AVX 2 an instruction set?
Posted on Reply
#19
qcmadness
EarthDogIsn't AVX 2 an instruction set?
Zen and Zen 2 both support AVX2. They differ in throughput only.
Posted on Reply
#20
ARF
EarthDogWell done, AMD!!!
KarymidoN"The AMD chip at its stock 45 W TDP beats the Intel one even with the Intel chip configured to 90 W cTDP"

holy sheet waiting for more reviews but this looks bad for intel.
chodaboy19Wow! mobile was intel's last bastion of performance. Intel's next gen can't come soon enough.
Everyone excited but MSI will come and say :D

Excuse us, guys, but we don't work with AMD APUs.
Why?! Because:
  • We don't want to experiment with unknown hardware
  • We had bad previous experience with AMD products
  • We receive payments from Intel
www.tomshardware.com/news/msi-ceo-interview-intel-shortage-amd,38473.html
Posted on Reply
#21
IceShroom
xkm1948This is not even Zen2 right?
Bristol Ridge -> Excavator
Raven Ridge -> Zen
Picasso -> Zen+
Renior -> Zen2
Posted on Reply
#22
Darmok N Jalad
I didn’t have much doubt that the performance would be there, as the process advantage should play out. Intel is probably pushing its 14nm+++ beyond the optimum power mark to keep performance gains (and sales) coming. What I am the most curious about is battery life and power efficiency. If that is good, then AMD has finally arrived in the mobile space. Again, with a process advantage, there’s no reason this shouldn’t be the case, but that is all in their execution.
Posted on Reply
#23
Daven
AMD has definitely made ultraportable laptops exciting for the first time with 8 cores, good IPC and good IGP in 15W. Up until recently, most of these kinds of laptops utilized dual cores and horrible IGP at 15W and lower. Some more expensive ones received quad cores and a little better graphics (Iris) but it wasn't that exciting until now.
Posted on Reply
#24
Xuper
Battery life among all reviews :
www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Battery-Page.png
images.hothardware.com/contentimages/article/2954/content/battery-life-asus-rog-zephyrus-g14.png
cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6hPiit6d3p4iC6LXTaxxDU-650-80.png
hexus.net/media/uploaded/2020/3/8ec7191f-c434-4869-85ac-3dc3e82b8969.png
hexus.net/media/uploaded/2020/3/d0bc753d-ec5d-43ab-a3a5-b3132f9d588b.png
hexus.net/media/uploaded/2020/3/44303c92-ad06-460c-ba71-d3bf80773e23.png
hexus.net/media/uploaded/2020/3/e65b0ac4-0567-422d-b19c-fea57d21156a.png
images.idgesg.net/images/article/2020/03/asus_rog_zephyrus_g14_video_run_down-100836710-orig.jpg
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 27th, 2024 09:01 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts