Question CPU for Surface Laptop 3.

[LikeLinus]

So I went ahead and ordered a Surface Laptop 3 with the Ryzen cpu, 16gb of ram and 512mb SSD. But I'm seeing conflicting reports about the Intel CPU and Ryzen. Microsoft is saying it's the "fastest mobile CPU/GPU on the marketing". But then some articles talk about the speed advantage of the i7 and it appears to be the better all around cpu, but maybe not as great as the Ryzen GPU. Battery life on both is said to be the same. So I'm not taking in to account the 25w vs 15w.

Plus, from what I've seen, the business version is strictly Intel. Now I'm on the fence and just wondered what everyone's opinion is.

FYI: This will not be for gaming. It's simply for light (travel editing, review and backing up 4K material and photos) video production and graphics. I currently have a MacBook Pro (2017) and a Surface Pro 4. Love them both and they are great, but I want to try the Surface Laptop 3 for fun. Love new toys, guilty as charged

The other advantage of the business machine is they go to 32GB and 1TB SSD. But my primary concern is the CPU and if I should order an Intel one just to be safe. I can always cancel one of them.

 

[LikeLinus]

It's pretty awesome that Intel is curb stomping AMD in the new Surface Laptop 3. I can't believe that MS used AMD because they are using highly inferior technology.

I'd highly suspect that MS did this to put pressure on Intel to lower prices. Competition is a bit pricing motivator. It's a shame that AMD
didn't go with Zen2, but, to me, it seems apparent that MS was pushing it to consumers as a power play. That, to me, seems to be the reason MS kept Intel for business and corporate customers. Keep the good for the best. Sad though!

 

[Markfw]

It's pretty awesome that Intel is curb stomping AMD in the new Surface Laptop 3. I can't believe that MS used AMD because they are using highly inferior technology.

I'd highly suspect that MS did this to put pressure on Intel to lower prices. Competition is a bit pricing motivator. It's a shame that AMD
didn't go with Zen2, but, to me, it seems apparent that MS was pushing it to consumers as a power play. That, to me, seems to be the reason MS kept Intel for business and corporate customers. Keep the good for the best. Sad though!

OK, would you give us inks/pictures/facts that Intel is cub-stomping AMD in the surface 3 ?

 

[LikeLinus]

OK, would you give us inks/pictures/facts that Intel is cub-stomping AMD in the surface 3 ?

I have both in my possession, as photos show, this is my personal opinion. AMD really screwed up by using Zen+, DDR4 and Wifi 5. WTF were they thinking??? LOL. Every article shows the poor performance.

 

[Thunder 57]

It's pretty awesome that Intel is curb stomping AMD in the new Surface Laptop 3. I can't believe that MS used AMD because they are using highly inferior technology.

I'd highly suspect that MS did this to put pressure on Intel to lower prices. Competition is a bit pricing motivator. It's a shame that AMD
didn't go with Zen2, but, to me, it seems apparent that MS was pushing it to consumers as a power play. That, to me, seems to be the reason MS kept Intel for business and corporate customers. Keep the good for the best. Sad though!

You and I must have a very different definition of "curb stomping". AMD/MS couldn't go with Zen 2, because it isn't out yet! Surely you know that? It sounds like you just want to piss on AMD or MS despite the reviews saying it's a great device with a below average battery life. Zen 2 on 7nm and with LPDDR4X will surely fix that. They are just getting started. Think of it as selling the Williamette P4 knowing full well that Northwood would be the "real deal".

 

[Thunder 57]

I have both in my possession, as photos show, this is my personal opinion. AMD really screwed up by using Zen+, DDR4 and Wifi 5. WTF were they thinking??? LOL. Every article shows the poor performance.

What else was AMD supposed to use? Renoir isn't available yet! Picasso doesn't support LPDDR4X. AMD doesn't make NIC's, that's on MS. Get your facts straight.

 

[zinfamous]

This could be interesting. There were some minor improvements internally to the Vega 20 CUs. They also made big improvements in the FP64 capabilities and some of the Int capabilities. I think that, with the improved memory bandwidth of LPDDR4X and by potentially doing what they did in Bristol Ridge and not crippling some of the higher end capabilities of the CUs, Renoir could be a VERY interesting for pro versions of these notebooks.

yeah, I could easily be sold on that, assuming LPDDR4X is supported, a 7nm Vega 20 sounds fine. ....now just put in a good modem and more reasonable SSD prices, and it's a no-brainer.

 

[zinfamous]

What else was AMD supposed to use? Renoir isn't available yet! Picasso doesn't support LPDDR4X. AMD doesn't make NIC's, that's on MS. Get your facts straight.

yeah that was a very strange series of mis-aimed accusations, lol.

 

[Panino Manino]

That Zen 2 isn't available yet for mobiles is a reason to criticize AMD in my opinion. AMD may have the technology to beat Intel, but it's worth nothing if this technology arrives one year late.

The way it is may be competitive, but definitively inferior.

 

[Thunder 57]

That Zen 2 isn't available yet for mobiles is a reason to criticize AMD in my opinion. AMD may have the technology to beat Intel, but it's worth nothing if this technology arrives one year late.

The way it is may be competitive, but definitively inferior.

AMD spent their resources on the more lucrative markets. Mobile for AMD has been a dumpster fire for years now. OEM's put them in cheap laptops with crappy 720p screens, 5400 HDD's, and other crap choices.

That's finally changing. My sister just got a nice Picasso laptop with a good IPS screen, NVMe SSD, dual channel RAM, nice backlit keyboard, USB-C, and it's been great. Now Surface is using AMD. It's only a matter of time before they get more market share and AMD makes mobile more of a priority. I expect great things from Renoir. It will be the first Zen mobile not handicapped by something. Currently Picasso is only constrained by DDR4-2400 memory and stupid OEM choices. Those are both going away. It was always so annoying to see AMD APU's crippled by single channel RAM.

 

[thesmokingman]

These are laptops... it's weird and off putting sifting thru fanboy speak... they're laptops dude!




calling members, fanboys is not allowed here


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Thunder 57]

These are laptops... it's weird and off putting sifting thru fanboy speak... they're laptops dude!

Who are you referring to? I was just pointing out that @LikeLinus had stated factually incorrect arguments and said that the Intel version "curb stomped" the AMD one, also blatantly untrue. I mean, you can have that opinion, but the reviewers out there would disagree.

 

[thesmokingman]

Who are you referring to? I was just pointing out that @LikeLinus had stated factually incorrect arguments and said that the Intel version "curb stomped" the AMD one, also blatantly untrue. I mean, you can have that opinion, but the reviewers out there would disagree.

Not pointing out individuals and not you either if that was the concern. I've read the AT earlier because I was interested to see how AMD's stop gap measured up. It's clearly not a high end competitor but for a first attempt in the high end space, I got the impression that it was a decent result even being somewhat hamstrung by component choices. Clearly it's no where near unseating Intel's dominance in the mobile space but it's definitely not junky either. Hmm, maybe I should have left that comment unposted somethings are better thought than shared...

 

[Thunder 57]

Not pointing out individuals and not you either if that was the concern. I've read the AT earlier because I was interested to see how AMD's stop gap measured up. It's clearly not a high end competitor but for a first attempt in the high end space, I got the impression that it was a decent result even being somewhat hamstrung by component choices. Clearly it's no where near unseating Intel's dominance in the mobile space but it's definitely not junky either. Hmm, maybe I should have left that comment unposted somethings are better thought than shared...

Nah, it's alright. I get how annoying it can be when the AMD vs Intel crowd gets into it. I just try to stay unbiased, which was not what I think was happening with some others comments. I agree it's a good first effort, but I think the best has yet to come.

 

[Abwx]

It's pretty awesome that Intel is curb stomping AMD in the new Surface Laptop 3. I can't believe that MS used AMD because they are using highly inferior technology.

I'd highly suspect that MS did this to put pressure on Intel to lower prices. Competition is a bit pricing motivator. It's a shame that AMD
didn't go with Zen2, but, to me, it seems apparent that MS was pushing it to consumers as a power play. That, to me, seems to be the reason MS kept Intel for business and corporate customers. Keep the good for the best. Sad though!

So no benches and tests of yours but still, you came to a conclusion..?

Or are the Cinebench and GPU scores not the expected ones on the Intel..?

Because from what i did read at NBC the Ryzen Surface has some downside but nowhere as big as the ones on the previous Surfaces that were all Intel, and dont expect ICL to make miracles, from the few reviews at NBC it appear that the Intel is below Vega 10 GPU wise and is about on par CPU wise at same power.

Also i find curious that you mentioned Wifi 6 and Qualcomm Wifi 5 chip used in the AMD model as being allegedly a very bad point, all this without providing numbers at least of yours.

Because in the NBC tests only the Lenovo with Wifi 6 manage to outperform by a mere 10% the Wifi 5 from Qualcomm at 1metre distance of the station, at 10 metres the Qualcomm is clearly better, in the Dell XPS their Intel Wifi 6 is even worse, slower than Qualcomm Wifi5 chip, and in the Razer Blade review they didnt even specify the speed of this decidly slow Wifi 6...

 

[moinmoin]

I have both in my possession, as photos show, this is my personal opinion. AMD really screwed up by using Zen+, DDR4 and Wifi 5. WTF were they thinking??? LOL. Every article shows the poor performance.

Using Qualcomm's Wifi 5 in the AMD Surface is on Microsoft. They could easily use Intel Wifi 5 or even 6 instead. Anybody can buy the AX200 network adapter, it's not even expensive.

 

[Gideon]

It's pretty awesome that Intel is curb stomping AMD in the new Surface Laptop 3. I can't believe that MS used AMD because they are using highly inferior technology.

I'd highly suspect that MS did this to put pressure on Intel to lower prices. Competition is a bit pricing motivator. It's a shame that AMD
didn't go with Zen2, but, to me, it seems apparent that MS was pushing it to consumers as a power play. That, to me, seems to be the reason MS kept Intel for business and corporate customers. Keep the good for the best. Sad though!

This statement is just as meaningless as saying "LULZ Rome is curb stomping Cascade Lake in servers, why isn't Intel releasing 64 core Ice Lakes?"

1. It's pretty clear that this is a multi-year partnership (considering how MS praised the AMD chip and how they are already designing a successor)
2. AMD couldn't "just have used zen2" it just isn't ready for the timeframe, but Microsoft still wanted to release something before the holiday. This is the best they could do for now
3. I'm pretty sure that MS will be one of the first customers of Renoir, once it becomes available (looks like 2020Q1-Q2), an the Surface laptop will be swiftly upgraded.

 

[liahos1]

for all we know AMD gave MS a sweetheart deal or gave away the chips at cost to get into a surface.

 

[Markfw]

for all we know AMD gave MS a sweetheart deal or gave away the chips at cost to get into a surface.

For all we know, Intel may have done the same thing.

 

[dahorns]

It's pretty awesome that Intel is curb stomping AMD in the new Surface Laptop 3. I can't believe that MS used AMD because they are using highly inferior technology.

I'd highly suspect that MS did this to put pressure on Intel to lower prices. Competition is a bit pricing motivator. It's a shame that AMD
didn't go with Zen2, but, to me, it seems apparent that MS was pushing it to consumers as a power play. That, to me, seems to be the reason MS kept Intel for business and corporate customers. Keep the good for the best. Sad though!

By all means, share your opinions. But, when you do so, it'd be nice if you provided some facts, details, and reasoning behind them, particularly when you're in the unique position of comparing both laptops. Are you planning on returning the AMD unit already?

 

[liahos1]

For all we know, Intel may have done the same thing.

Why would they? They have the better chip and are running short supply lol

 

[jpiniero]

Yeah given how expensive the Surface laptops are I doubt MS got an above average deal on either.

 

[thesmokingman]

for all we know AMD gave MS a sweetheart deal or gave away the chips at cost to get into a surface.

Why go there? AMD already have a fantastic relationship with MS. Not sure you realize they make the Xbox chips...

 

[liahos1]

Why go there? AMD already have a fantastic relationship with MS. Not sure you realize they make the Xbox chips...

Yes and the GM AMD gets from MSFT on their xbox APUs are the lowest in their portfolio.

 

[thesmokingman]

Yes and the GM AMD gets from MSFT on their xbox APUs are the lowest in their portfolio.

Proof, hell proof of anything you've been posting?

 

[liahos1]

Proof, hell proof of anything you've been posting?

Call AMD investor relations? Call any sellside bank that has a buy rating on AMD?

For all the tech intelligence in this thread, when you guys start spilling over into financials many hit a brick wall. Financials are my livelihood.

But let me be clear. The GM AMD gets from both Sony and MSFT are the lowest in their portfolio. Basically, the console biz is low gm