www.pcgamer.com
And that's getting to the crux of it, we already had the discussion before who exactly is responsible for the lower GPU level picks in AMD laptops, without a clear answer. AMD, OEMs, Intel, Nvidia?
The Zephyrus G14 is a worse choice compared to the MSI GE65 if the only thing I'm after is price and performance. That's the point Intel is trying to get across.
The 3-year-old claims are all done with the same GPU.
Oh I'm sorry, they only used DDR4-2133mhz instead vs the DDR4-2933mhz for Comet Lake.
The A15 isn't much faster than the G14 - maybe 15% best case.
That's Anandtech's policy when reviewing CPUs. Nothing wrong with that. It's likely that if you are upgrading from a three year old PC then you'll buy faster RAM.
Anandtech's policy is to use what the CPUs are rated for. The 7700K is also rated for DDR4-2400.The A15 isn't much faster than the G14 - maybe 15% best case.
Asus Zephyrus G15 vs Zephyrus G14, TUF Gaming A15- AMD Ryzen laptops compared
In these past few weeks we've reviewed the entire range of AMD Ryzen laptops from Asus available in stores at this point, but if you're still confused betweenwww.ultrabookreview.com
That's Anandtech's policy when reviewing CPUs. Nothing wrong with that. It's likely that if you are upgrading from a three year old PC then you'll buy faster RAM.
The point wasn't the benchmark specifics, but continued and complete reliance on benchmarks to advertise their products and drive sales. They need to prove performance supremacy even when they don't have it, because they have nothing else to replace it with as USP.
The A15 is $1200. MSI GL65 is $1300. While this certainly makes the AMD laptop $100 cheaper, the Intel one is still going to be faster.
Games. Gaming performance is all Intel has to tout right now. You bet that they'll go the extra mile to drive home this fact. That's what they're doing with these slides. Its too bad AMD is woefully incompetent in this regard. They need their own Ryan Shrout. At least they'll avoid making blunders like passing off 3DMark performance as gaming performance. Maybe AdoredTV might be worth hiring.
Which leads us back to value, which if you remember was the comparison Intel was making. They even underlined 'at a lower price' at the end because that is the comparison they're making here. Not overall performance. (By the way, if you're wondering why the prices are from 28th April for a pretty new set of slides, it's because the GL65 is now at $1399 on Amazon in the US whereas the A15 is still MSRP)
That doesn't mean anything - maybe the tests were conducted on 28th April?
They also drove home the point of value with the 9300H in the Lenovo Legion vs the 4800H in the ASUS Tuf.
Is there a comparison between these two laptops somewhere, or are you only assuming that the MSI laptop is going to be faster?
I'm talking about meaningful advantage, not technical wins with less than 5% difference.
If you believe Intel's claims that is. It's a simple analysis to make. The Tuf A15 is 15% ahead of the G14 best case and adding 15% to the baseline provided by Intel still means that the A15 will be 5% behind the GL65.
I don't think that the performance gains with Zen 3 will be large enough for AMD to score anything more than technical wins in gaming. It'll be the same as now except with Intel and AMD swapping positions.
That's quite incorrect. It is achievable while respecting Intel's PL2 and tau values.
That was the point: I was talking about Intel losing the opportunity to claim leadership in gaming, not AMD scoring a meaningful win.
Facebook
Twitter