Intel i5-7y54 vs i5-6200u

[Vort3x_]

Hello everyone!

So it's been a while for me as I spent a lot of time here reading while building my first PC in the summer. But now I've been looking into buying an ultrabook and comparing the newest models.

So I bumped into the newest intel mobile processor technology in i5-7y54. I was REALLY impressed about the TDP value of 5W and the low base clock in comparison to the max boost clock. So I was sad to notice this processor has been used only in very few, smallest ultrabooks out there and the best thing from manufacturer's perspective seems to be the opportunity to build a fanless laptop.

So I looked into some benchmarks, mainly comparing to the i5-6200U. So the results from the notebookcheck.net:
1. single core performance was exactly the same and more stable.
2. The multi-core performance on the other hand was worse but still decent compared to 6200u.
3. But in 3dmark there was no competition, 6200u crushed it.

So my question is this: Is 7y54 just an ultimate option for the smallest laptops or is it a real competition for 6200U and 7200U in real life use?

Has anyone got an idea of the power consumption difference, is it just about less heat or actually significant difference in battery life?

And maybe the biggest question: How does 3dmark effect non-gaming real life use/performance? If I want to be able to run let's say matlab and everything in real life use but not gaming at all, is 7y54 actually any worse in that case? I'm really intrigued about the power savings if it's as effective in real life use.

Thanks in advance I'm hoping some real insight.

 

[Ecky]

The Core-Y CPUs will perform very similarly to "U" and higher chips in bursty workloads, where the CPU will only need to clock up for fractions of a second, because turbo allows for it to temporarily consume far more than its 5w TDP so long as it's not exceeding the average cooling ability of the device it's installed in. They're perfectly suited to things like web browsing and light office work. However, during any extended workload (gaming, rendering, encoding) it's going to drop back down to very low sustained clockspeeds to stay within that 5w average thermal limit.

 

[Vort3x_]

The Core-Y CPUs will perform very similarly to "U" and higher chips in bursty workloads, where the CPU will only need to clock up for fractions of a second, because turbo allows for it to temporarily consume far more than its 5w TDP so long as it's not exceeding the average cooling ability of the device it's installed in. They're perfectly suited to things like web browsing and light office work. However, during any extended workload (gaming, rendering, encoding) it's going to drop back down to very low sustained clockspeeds to stay within that 5w average thermal limit.

Thanks for your answer!

So I will not have a need for rendering or that sort of demanding usage. I'm just wondering as the y-model got crushed in 3Dmark, is there any kind of real life use that would suffer similar to it. For example is watching really high quality video compared to this in any way? As I mentioned the single-core performance is identical probably thanks to the turbo boost which you as well mentioned, but multi-core was quite bad and 3dmark was awful. So do I find these differences harmful in anyway in basic usage, or something little bit demanding at least for the cpu like programming or such... Because if not at all I will surely benefit from the pro sides of the y-model like power savings and better thermals...