News Core i9-13900HX Raptor Lake Mobile CPU Outperforms 12900K in Geekbench

Neilbob

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2014
265
350
19,720
I often wonder about the need for these many cores for the majority of desktop users, but I can see a purpose in some cases. In this form factor, I'm really struggling to figure out who could possibly benefit from them? Are there really that many people rendering and video editing on a laptop?

Other than people (and companies of course) being able to gas on about how big their numbers are in this benchmark that REALLY represents a regular usage scenario! Whoo!
 

samopa

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2015
205
56
18,660
Most of students, especially university students (at least in my country) only have laptops, no desktops, because : a. Its to expensive to them to own 2 PCs, and b. It provide conveniences (easy to carry, less space, less power) that matter to them.
For university students, specially IT or IT related students, their laptops must be capable to tackle many assignment throw at them, and in my country, the number of IT (related) student grows exponentially.
 
I thought battery life was also an important metric for mobile parts? I mean, getting "desktop like" performance is not terribly hard if you just make the mobile CPU behave like a desktop one. This is not impressive in the least.

What would be impressive is Intel getting this performance AND beating AMD in battery life of a fully assembled laptop using the same battery size. Until then, this is just a misleading "win".

I can hear people now say "but you can work plugged in!". So we're at the point where we're willing to sacrifice mobility and portability of a laptop for raw power? Sure, these can lower their TDP dynamically, but still make a laptop unnecessarily bulky to cool it when going full blast. I still dislike that dichotomy.

Regards.
 
I thought battery life was also an important metric for mobile parts? I mean, getting "desktop like" performance is not terribly hard if you just make the mobile CPU behave like a desktop one. This is not impressive in the least.

What would be impressive is Intel getting this performance AND beating AMD in battery life of a fully assembled laptop using the same battery size. Until then, this is just a misleading "win".

I can hear people now say "but you can work plugged in!". So we're at the point where we're willing to sacrifice mobility and portability of a laptop for raw power? Sure, these can lower their TDP dynamically, but still make a laptop unnecessarily bulky to cool it when going full blast. I still dislike that dichotomy.

Regards.

Yeah for sure. But Intel's chips do have an extensive amount of configurable clock speeds and TDPs. So maybe it depends on the laptop manufacturer?
 
Yeah for sure. But Intel's chips do have an extensive amount of configurable clock speeds and TDPs. So maybe it depends on the laptop manufacturer?
Indeed it is. OEMs will probably make a few "poster children" and that's it.

Flipping the argument on its head: you could put a 5800X3D or 7950X in a laptop, change their name slightly and call it a day. That doesn't make them mobile CPUs, I guess, perhaps?

Regards.
 
Indeed it is. OEMs will probably make a few "poster children" and that's it.

Flipping the argument on its head: you could put a 5800X3D or 7950X in a laptop, change their name slightly and call it a day. That doesn't make them mobile CPUs, I guess, perhaps?

Regards.

Very true, with how power-hungry Intel's mobile CPUs have gotten, you can basically blurr the lines between desktop and laptop these days.