News Intel Tiger Lake Laptop Listings Suggest Imminent 10nm Launch, Start at $1,000

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
How is this supposed to compete with cheaper, better battery life and faster laptops from AMD?
My brother just bought an Acer Swift 3 8 cores Ryzen 4700U for 650$, its for work and light gaming 720p-1080p. Acer claims 11.5h battery life.
 
Zizo007 said:
How is this supposed to compete with cheaper, better battery life and faster laptops from AMD?
My brother just bought an Acer Swift 3 8 cores Ryzen 4700U for 650$, its for work and light gaming 720p-1080p. Acer claims 11.5h battery life.
Click to expand...

No one is using a 14" thin and light as a render box. Those additional cores will rarely prove useful unless you run cinebench all day on your ultra portable. Leaks have indicated the Xe IGP is faster than AMD's current IGP and I fully expect Tiger Lake with it's improved 10nm process to have a distinct per core performance advantage over Ryzen 4000 which will make it faster in every day use. Also, Acer's website has the 4700U with a maximum of 11 hours, while the only 14" Intel i7 model is rated at 12 hours. So, don't know where you are getting battery life for the AMD model. Looks like a performance sweep for Intel, along with a higher price.
 
spongiemaster said:
No one is using a 14" thin and light as a render box. Those additional cores will rarely prove useful unless you run cinebench all day on your ultra portable. Leaks have indicated the Xe IGP is faster than AMD's current IGP and I fully expect Tiger Lake with it's improved 10nm process to have a distinct per core performance advantage over Ryzen 4000 which will make it faster in every day use. Also, Acer's website has the 4700U with a maximum of 11 hours, while the only 14" Intel i7 model is rated at 12 hours. So, don't know where you are getting battery life for the AMD model. Looks like a performance sweep for Intel, along with a higher price.
Click to expand...
Why not render with it? Reviews show 58C max temp under stress test. Its not worth double the price, not even for the same price. My brother is an IT, he renders videos, use Virtual Machine a lot, multitask a lot and need those cores for heavy IT programs, Virtualization and big Excel files.
 
Zizo007 said:
How is this supposed to compete with cheaper, better battery life and faster laptops from AMD?
My brother just bought an Acer Swift 3 8 cores Ryzen 4700U for 650$, its for work and light gaming 720p-1080p. Acer claims 11.5h battery life.
Click to expand...
Well there is a lot to unpack here. First the better battery life and faster claim is merely your assertion, your speculation. You can’t possibly know either the performance or battery life of an unreleased Intel processor that has yet to be reviewed in order to make a comparison. Heck even the AMD cpu that has not been reviewed either. What you know is simply the results of a few random leaked benchmarks in who knows how early Tiger lake engineering sample. But even going from these few so far leaks we see that the Tiger lake cpu beats the 4700U in per core performance, it ties with it pure multithreaded workloads and beats it thoroughly in igpu performance.

I also need to say here that the hexacore 4500U is not a 6c/12t cpu but a 6c/6t cpu so it is more comparable to a 4c/8t cpu of the same architecture. Similarly the octacore 4700U is not an 8-core/16-thread cpu but an 8-core/8-thread cpu so it is equivalent to a 6-core/12-thread cpu of the same architecture. Also we can be sure that the 11th gen 4c/8t Intel 15W flagship will be faster than any 10th gen 15W cpus including the 6c/12t Comet lake variant (the 10710U). So core count comparisons are not quite relevant. You have to wait for reviews.

As for battery life this cpu is manufactured on Intel 10nm+(+) process and it will be the first product to be released on that process so we cannot make any estimates regarding efficiency. This should be more efficient than last gen’s U series cpus though which already had an excellent battery life already. Also bear in mind here that when Acer now makes claims about battery life with Intel cpus they have to comply with project Athena standards in order to get the badge. For AMD cpus on the other hand they continue the same false advertising shenanigans OEM have always used. So 11.5 hours … yeah right…

Last but not least. The price of the cpu in a laptop is only a fraction of the cost. Even if the Intel cpu costs 100 dollars more that won’t make a laptop go from 650-700 dollars to 1000 dollars. It is priced higher because it is also paired with a better screen, more i/o (e.g. thunderbolt, etc), more RAM (16GB vs 8GB), larger capacity storage drive (512GB vs 256GB), it is more portable, it has smaller weight, etc. Try comparing the exact same configuration, etc with only difference being the cpu and the price difference will be much smaller and typically more than justified by the performance difference alone.
 
PCWarrior said:
Well there is a lot to unpack here. First the better battery life and faster claim is merely your assertion, your speculation. You can’t possibly know either the performance or battery life of an unreleased Intel processor that has yet to be reviewed in order to make a comparison. Heck even the AMD cpu that has not been reviewed either. What you know is simply the results of a few random leaked benchmarks in who knows how early Tiger lake engineering sample. But even going from these few so far leaks we see that the Tiger lake cpu beats the 4700U in per core performance, it ties with it pure multithreaded workloads and beats it thoroughly in igpu performance.

I also need to say here that the hexacore 4500U is not a 6c/12 cpu but a 6c/6c cpu so it is more comparable to a 4c/8t cpu of the same architecture. Similarly the octacore 4700U is not an 8-core/16-thread cpu but an 8-core/8-thread cpu so it is equivalent to a 6-core/12-thread cpu of the same architecture. Also we can be sure that the 11th gen 4c/8t Intel 15W flagship will be faster than any 10th gen 15W cpus including the 6c/12t Comet lake variant (the 10710U). So core count comparisons are not quite relevant. You have to wait for reviews.

As for battery life this cpu is manufactured on Intel 10nm+(+) process and it will be the first product to be released on that process so we cannot make any estimates regarding efficiency. This should be more efficient than last gen’s U series cpus though which already had an excellent battery life already. Also bear in mind here that when Acer now makes claims about battery life with Intel cpus they have to comply with project Athena standards in order to get the badge. For AMD cpus on the other hand they continue the same false advertising shenanigans OEM have always used. So 11.5 hours … yeah right…

Last but not least. The price of the cpu in a laptop is only a fraction of the cost. Even if the Intel cpu costs 100 dollars more that won’t make a laptop go from 650-700 dollars to 1000 dollars. It is priced higher because it is also paired with a better screen, more i/o (e.g. thunderbolt, etc), more RAM (16GB vs 8GB), larger capacity storage drive (512GB vs 256GB), it is more portable, it has smaller weight, etc. Try comparing the exact same configuration, etc with only difference being the cpu and the price difference will be much smaller and typically more than justified by the performance difference alone.
Click to expand...
Reviews of the laptop show 10-11h of battery life mixed usage, just look it up on Youtube. As for performance, true, we need to wait. The 4700U maxed at 58C in stress tests which is impressive. I don't expect Intel beating AMD even with 10nm unless they improve CPU architecture which they didn't. I won't pay double the price for the same performance, thank you.
 
Last edited:
PCWarrior said:
Well there is a lot to unpack here. First the better battery life and faster claim is merely your assertion, your speculation. You can’t possibly know either the performance or battery life of an unreleased Intel processor that has yet to be reviewed in order to make a comparison. Heck even the AMD cpu that has not been reviewed either. What you know is simply the results of a few random leaked benchmarks in who knows how early Tiger lake engineering sample. But even going from these few so far leaks we see that the Tiger lake cpu beats the 4700U in per core performance, it ties with it pure multithreaded workloads and beats it thoroughly in igpu performance.

I also need to say here that the hexacore 4500U is not a 6c/12t cpu but a 6c/6t cpu so it is more comparable to a 4c/8t cpu of the same architecture. Similarly the octacore 4700U is not an 8-core/16-thread cpu but an 8-core/8-thread cpu so it is equivalent to a 6-core/12-thread cpu of the same architecture. Also we can be sure that the 11th gen 4c/8t Intel 15W flagship will be faster than any 10th gen 15W cpus including the 6c/12t Comet lake variant (the 10710U). So core count comparisons are not quite relevant. You have to wait for reviews.

As for battery life this cpu is manufactured on Intel 10nm+(+) process and it will be the first product to be released on that process so we cannot make any estimates regarding efficiency. This should be more efficient than last gen’s U series cpus though which already had an excellent battery life already. Also bear in mind here that when Acer now makes claims about battery life with Intel cpus they have to comply with project Athena standards in order to get the badge. For AMD cpus on the other hand they continue the same false advertising shenanigans OEM have always used. So 11.5 hours … yeah right…

Last but not least. The price of the cpu in a laptop is only a fraction of the cost. Even if the Intel cpu costs 100 dollars more that won’t make a laptop go from 650-700 dollars to 1000 dollars. It is priced higher because it is also paired with a better screen, more i/o (e.g. thunderbolt, etc), more RAM (16GB vs 8GB), larger capacity storage drive (512GB vs 256GB), it is more portable, it has smaller weight, etc. Try comparing the exact same configuration, etc with only difference being the cpu and the price difference will be much smaller and typically more than justified by the performance difference alone.
Click to expand...
My 650$ Swift 3 is 512Gb NVMe 8Gb RAM which is enough, I don't know if the Intel is 16Gb. As for physical specs it depends on the brand and model, Swift 3 AMD beats Swift 3 Intel by a good amount yet less expensive. Same screen, same speakers, etc

Edit: Here's the review comparing both, the Swift 3 AMD has WiFi 6

650$ https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Octa-Co...3+4700u&qid=1592779501&sprefix=swift+3&sr=8-8

View: https://youtu.be/MHsxYOwLrSU
 
Last edited:
Zizo007 said:
My 650$ Swift 3 is 512Gb NVMe 8Gb RAM which is enough, I don't know if the Intel is 16Gb.
Click to expand...

Another reason someone could choose the Intel system is because they know how to read a spec sheet and can see the AMD system you are trying to compare is inferior feature wise. How do you not know how much RAM the Intel system has when it is listed in the specs in the original article? Because you never read the specs, and just went right to the comment section to post AMD is better at everything. The Intel system has 16GB of RAM, a touch screen, Windows 10 Pro, and a fingerprint reader all of which the AMD systems doesn't have. We can assume the Intel system will also have thunderbolt 3 since all the Ice Lake variants have it.

Why do you keep stating the 10-11 hour battery life like that is some sort of special feature? Most of the Intel systems have higher run times on the Acer spec sheets including, as I mentioned earlier, the only i7 system with a 14" screen.
 
spongiemaster said:
Another reason someone could choose the Intel system is because they know how to read a spec sheet and can see the AMD system you are trying to compare is inferior feature wise. How do you not know how much RAM the Intel system has when it is listed in the specs in the original article? Because you never read the specs, and just went right to the comment section to post AMD is better at everything. The Intel system has 16GB of RAM, a touch screen, Windows 10 Pro, and a fingerprint reader all of which the AMD systems doesn't have. We can assume the Intel system will also have thunderbolt 3 since all the Ice Lake variants have it.
Click to expand...
Yet you failed to read what I posted hahaha
The 650$ AMD has a fingerprint sensor.
For 600$ you can have touchscreen too, Lenovo ideapad 5, for 700-750, you can have 16Gb RAM too 😀
 
spongiemaster said:
No one is using a 14" thin and light as a render box. Those additional cores will rarely prove useful unless you run cinebench all day on your ultra portable. Leaks have indicated the Xe IGP is faster than AMD's current IGP and I fully expect Tiger Lake with it's improved 10nm process to have a distinct per core performance advantage over Ryzen 4000 which will make it faster in every day use. Also, Acer's website has the 4700U with a maximum of 11 hours, while the only 14" Intel i7 model is rated at 12 hours. So, don't know where you are getting battery life for the AMD model. Looks like a performance sweep for Intel, along with a higher price.
Click to expand...
I don't agree that "no one" is using a 14" laptop as a render box. While I don't think the number is high, I think you should be aware that people nowadays look for a laptop that is as thin and light as possible. If your job is to process video and photos and need to be on the go, I think it makes a lot of sense to get a light laptop that is as powerful as possible to complete the tasks. The extra 4 cores and 8 threads on the 4800U can be of great help here.

Leaks have shown that Xe iGPU is faster, yes. But I rather wait for official reviews than relying on leaks to determine the performance of Xe. There are a lot of unknown as to the specs/ test bed in these leaks. From the looks of it at this point, I feel both Vega 8 and the fastest Xe iGPU should be pretty close in performance. Graphic performance can easily be manipulated by using faster ram, thus, skewing the results. I would be interested to see how each of them perform say at DDR4 3200, and less so of the more expensive/ exotic LPDDR4 (exotic because not many laptop models will utilize these).

Looking at existing 10nm (I am using an Ice Lake laptop btw), I am not expecting Intel to pull a miracle with their supposed 10nm+. I do expect IPC improvements, but its going to be evolutionary, rather than revolutionary. If there is anything we learned from Intel's 14nm, the extra plus, seems to point to improvement in clockspeed, rather than efficiency. Thus my take is while IPC should see a good improvement on Tiger Lake, I don't expect them to close the gap between 4c/8t and 8c/16t significantly.

As for the battery life, again, I think best to wait for official reviews. PC makers can rate anything they want, and by now, we should be aware that whatever they quoted, they miss it by a signficant margin when we are actually using the laptop. At least at this point, most Renoir laptop reviews have confirmed that the battery life is good or very good, depending on the laptop battery capacity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom