TPU wars: Ryzen vs Intel T series

[JeffMD]

So I live in florida and as such heat is already a problem outside the house. In the past I have run desktop CPUs up to 80 TDP and find that idle + gaming leaves the room uncomfortably warm. For over a year I have been happy on a gaming laptop with a 40W TPU processor (1060gtx for gpu fyi), saddly though because of some bad marketing information I found out later that it didn't have lightning port capabilities for future upgrades. I am not looking to do anything at this very moment but I am keeping an eye on changes in tech that could let me switch back into the modular desktop I so prefer.

So I will say right off the bat that the Ryzen 5 2400G is looking fairly ideal for this because of its $160 price point and 9k cpu mark score. Intel has there T series desktop CPUs which are only 35W TPU (the ryzen can bounce between 45–65 with user settings) but cpu mark wise they i5 scores less by quite a bit and both the i5 and i7 are $100 or more in cost.

I've been a fan of intel for quite some time (I stepped into an fx6300 for a short time upgrading from my q6600 but when it was clear amd was not bringing new generations out I went to an intel xeon) but that ryzen looks incredible at that price point. It isn't any more powerful then the xeon I had nore the i7 in my laptop now, but for games at 1080p this performance point should be more then fine.

Any experience with these situations or anything I might be missing that would benefit or hurt my intended..err.. "heat production" targets? I havn't mentioned any intended video cards yet because that battleground changes daily both with new productions and price points. Also it will be the most expensive component so it will be subjected to when best I can afford.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Unless you intend to use the IGP in the 2400G I highly recommend stepping up to the 1600/2600. While not strictly within your target TDP, the performance per watt is plenty worth it. 65W on the desktop is very easy to handle.

 

[ZGR]

You can configure your own TDP in your motherboard's BIOS. I would avoid the T series.

I wouldn't worry about it. 1080p60 is so easy to run that I would disable Intel Turbo Boost on your laptop, plug in a monitor + kbm and enjoy.

 

[JeffMD]

Unless you intend to use the IGP in the 2400G I highly recommend stepping up to the 1600/2600. While not strictly within your target TDP, the performance per watt is plenty worth it. 65W on the desktop is very easy to handle.

I am not using the igp but 65w is just really unappealing and not needed. I am trying to get the best performance for the tpu, not for the cost. My issue is not cooling, it is heat production.

You can configure your own TDP in your motherboard's BIOS. I would avoid the T series.

I wouldn't worry about it. 1080p60 is so easy to run that I would disable Intel Turbo Boost on your laptop, plug in a monitor + kbm and enjoy.

That is how I currently run the laptop, I have the same mechanical Kb and monitor from before, just now plugged into a laptop instead. And for now this is fine and everything works fine, but my ability to upgrade the gpu in the future is cut off so either I could go for another gaming laptop, or try and make a desktop with simular thermals. In the past, laptop CPUs were not available for desktops so low TDP high powered chips were quite limited. Now it seems I have much better options.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I am not using the igp but 65w is just really unappealing and not needed. I am trying to get the best performance for the tpu, not for the cost. My issue is not cooling, it is heat production.

If money is no issue, you can't really go wrong with an 8700T. Its a 35W chip, but you can set the cTDP down to 25W.

Coupled with high frequncy memory (>3200MHz) I doubt you can cram more performance into a 25W TDP.

 

[Indus]

If money is no issue, you can't really go wrong with an 8700T. Its a 35W chip, but you can set the cTDP down to 25W.

Coupled with high frequncy memory (>3200MHz) I doubt you can cram more performance into a 25W TDP.

Seriously.. that is only a 2.4 ghz base with a single thread turbo of 4 ghz.

 

[JeffMD]

If money is no issue, you can't really go wrong with an 8700T. Its a 35W chip, but you can set the cTDP down to 25W.

Coupled with high frequncy memory (>3200MHz) I doubt you can cram more performance into a 25W TDP.

Yea the 8700T is def ideal if money is no issue.. but money is always an issue.. otherwise I would just add a second AC unit for the room. ^^ The 4k cpu mark increase on the 8700T makes it ever so much superior, but I think it comes down to the fact that ~9k cpu marks is more then adequate for 1080p gaming and is a third of the cost.

 

[IRobot23]

Clear answer is ryzen.

Below 3GHz it actully realy low power CPU + Soldered.

APU is also an option, but it is not soldered.

 

[coercitiv]

Any experience with these situations or anything I might be missing that would benefit or hurt my intended..err.. "heat production" targets?

Buy standard voltage parts from either Intel or AMD and limit TDP via BIOS settings or straight underclock + undervolt. On the Intel side power management is excellent, you just need to set a power target via BIOS. You can, for example, buy a i5 8500 and set power target anywhere between 25-45W TDP. Whether it's AMD or Intel, you should consider getting a 6 core. As long as you have some knowledge about PCs (enough to work you way through BIOS and OS power settings) I strongly recommend building with standard TDP parts, especially considering your power limits are not set by enclosure and airflow, but rather by your room's heat capacity.

Also keep in mind your other components will be just as important for the final build heat output:

• aim for a 450W Gold/Platinum PSU (Corsair SF450 is an excellent SFX power supply, Seasonic Focus+ are also great compact ATX units)
  
• consider making a small build, since the mITX boards are bound to be more energy efficient (or go mATX). With proper settings (including enabling C-States via BIOS) a small system can end up using as low as 15W at idle w/o dGPU.
  
• monitor power usage is very important, so aim for a modern model if possible.
• make sure you have a lot of airflow in your case and invest in good cooling (good CPU heatsink, dGPU with beefy cooler) since keeping these components at low temps will lower system power consumption.

 

[scannall]

I would agree with the posters that are suggesting the 65 watt 2600. In bios, you can downclock and undervolt them to whatever your target is. Then when winter comes, let it run a little harder.

 

[Yuriman]

Intel's B360 and H310 chipsets draw something like ~30w less than Z370, and that's all the time, not just under load.

Intel CPUs and NV GPUs have better performance per watt, so if you're looking at heat production, that's what I'd go with.

 

[coercitiv]

Intel's B360 and H310 chipsets draw something like ~30w less than Z370, and that's all the time, not just under load.

My mITX Z270 system draws 17W at idle (measured at wall), and while B360 is surely more power efficient than the Z370 , I doubt the jump can be so extreme (afaik Z370 is a Z270 rebadge). The more likely reason is overall board efficiency, since components around the chipset can play a bigger role in system power usage.

 

[IRobot23]

Intel's B360 and H310 chipsets draw something like ~30w less than Z370, and that's all the time, not just under load.

Intel CPUs and NV GPUs have better performance per watt, so if you're looking at heat production, that's what I'd go with.

Nope.
Its all about ITX/mATX and ATX. Well some high end OC made ATX board will draw more than others, but not by much. Yet some great Z370 ITX can draw less than B360 ITX.

I don't know why he is considering Intel when AMD has really good and better option.

 

[Yuriman]

Came to mind from this review:

https://www.techspot.com/review/1603-intel-b360-chipset/

A 33w reduction (25% total system power) with zero performance hit is very attractive to me. As you say, I'm sure that varies from board to board, but Intel is clearly the better option when it comes to performance on a fixed power budget.

The i5 8400 would probably be my choice. At a package power of ~50 watts, it outperforms any Ryzen CPU in nearly every game. That's 30% less power than an R5 1600 and around 45% less than a 1700X.

And, NV's current GPU design is considerably more efficient than AMD's - the GTX 1060 performs at ~120w about as well as the RX 580 does at 185w, just as an example.

My 2 cents.

 

[Topweasel]

The problem with Ryzen is do to production numbers and shared dies. The 2400 15w-25 shows what AMD can do when they undervolt Ryzen. Epyc is another good example over 2GHz all cores on a 32c CPU with that power usage is crazy good. But AMD is stretched too thin and probably won't have a fully established portfolio until Ryzen 3k or maybe farther out. For example it's sitting on just two laptop sku's. That means they still don't have room for and are no offering truly low powered Ryzen's. Sure we can do the undervolting ourselves. But then we aren't getting binned dies meant for the job.

Nothing beats Intel's binning and portfolio and this is a choice best left to CPU's meant for the task. The 8700T will be by far the best CPU you can get for multiple reasons for such a power limited request.

 

[coercitiv]

Came to mind from this review:

https://www.techspot.com/review/1603-intel-b360-chipset/

A 33w reduction (25% total system power) with zero performance hit is very attractive to me. As you say, I'm sure that varies from board to board, but Intel is clearly the better option when it comes to performance on a fixed power budget.

That data does not directly imply the B360 chipset is the main reason the MSI B360 Gaming Plus is more power efficient than MSI Z370 Godlike, Steve clearly pointed out he was comparing a $500 feature rich board vs. a $115 budget oriented model.

Take a look at the power delta between these Z370 setups in the Tom's Hardware review for MSI Z370i Gaming Pro Carbon, the ITX model. There's a near 50W difference between the MSI board and the Gigabyte Z370 WiFi under load, and these 2 boards have 10W lower idle power than the rest of the lineup. Same chipset, different board load-out and probably different power management settings.

Spoiler: Power Consumption - different Z370 boards

To give you a few more data points, at idle my Coffee Lake system consumes just under 40W when running with a dGPU (RX 580) and 25W when running with iGPU. The board is the MSI Z370M Gaming Pro AC, CPU is i7 8700, RAM is 2x8GB running at 3466Mhz @ 1.4V, and at idle 3 fans are still running at minimum RPM. The PSU, albeit Gold rated, is far from an efficient choice since it's a 850W model. A system built around this board could easily reach 20W with a more efficient setup, and I bet the mITX model would go even lower.

The only reason the OP should consider a B360 board would be price, but if the opportunity presents itself to buy a good small form factor Z board at significant discount, power usage will not be a problem.

 

[JeffMD]

Ok so it looks like the best thing to do is go with a standard CPU and undervolt. I'll have to research the bioses to find one with an easy interface, preferably one that can be adjusted in real time in windows.

It will be as small a box as I can get away with, the only thing it needs to be capable of 1060/1070 level video cards.

 

[JeffMD]

So I am liking the looks of the i5 8400 paired with a b360 chipset. I will probably go with the ASUS ROG STRIX B360-G GAMING. Gaming performance compared to the ryzen 1600 seem matched and AMD easily wins on multi threaded productivity operations, but I was more impressed with the power draw on the b360 motherboards.