News Microsoft's Intel-Based Surface Laptop 5 Gets Worse Battery Life Than AMD's Laptop 4

[Admin]

Microsoft's Surface Laptop 5 gets new 12th Gen Intel CPUs. But our tests show shorter battery life and performance that's not always better than the AMD-powered Surface Laptop 4.

Microsoft's Intel-Based Surface Laptop 5 Gets Worse Battery Life Than AMD's Laptop 4 : Read more

 

[rluker5]

If you used a 2w Atom the Atom's battery life would completely destroy the vastly faster Ryzen 4980. That chip can't even idle that low. But your laptop would suck because it is using a 2w Atom.
The largest difference is the faster (40% single, 30% multi, in cinebench) chip is using more power. As usual.
Maybe MS decided to upgrade their performance. Usually the faster chip uses more power.
Also did the handbrake test use quick sync? I think that is an option and it isn't unfair to enable a hardware advantage when doing a hardware comparison.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

If you used a 2w Atom the Atom's battery life would completely destroy the vastly faster Ryzen 4980. That chip can't even idle that low. But your laptop would suck because it is using a 2w Atom.
The largest difference is the faster (40% single, 30% multi, in cinebench) chip is using more power. As usual.
Maybe MS decided to upgrade their performance. Usually the faster chip uses more power.
Also did the handbrake test use quick sync? I think that is an option and it isn't unfair to enable a hardware advantage when doing a hardware comparison.

Yeah but the zen 3 6000 mobile series with RDNA2 graphics is much faster at the same power usage compared to 4000 series and idles at lower power levels so Microsoft’s decision seems like one of back door dealings reminiscent of old Intel. I would be all for Microsoft ditching AMD if Intel was faster AND same or more power efficient, but to be less power efficient in this market segment does not seem a logical choice unless Intel is trying their anti-competitive “discounts for Intel loyalty” offers again.

 

[Sleepy_Hollowed]

On portable devices not used for gaming/engineering, better battery is top priority, so that’s a wtf.

 

[rluker5]

Yeah but the zen 3 6000 mobile series with RDNA2 graphics is much faster at the same power usage compared to 4000 series and idles at lower power levels so Microsoft’s decision seems like one of back door dealings reminiscent of old Intel. I would be all for Microsoft ditching AMD if Intel was faster AND same or more power efficient, but to be less power efficient in this market segment does not seem a logical choice unless Intel is trying their anti-competitive “discounts for Intel loyalty” offers again.

Zen3 6000 series is still significantly slower in single thread than the Alder couterpart and there may not have been adequate stock available.
So it looks at least as likely that MS wanted a premium chip for their premium product, and wanted to be able to have that product available for sale as your "backdoor deals" theory.
Making a deal to put in a slower product in exchange for money is what you are accusing MS of doing here when it is just the opposite. That is likely what would be the case if they went with the inferior (except for low end gaming) AMD APU.
And note my first point: there are more efficient, and slower chips out there than both of these options. But almost 10 hours of continuous use isn't bad for top performance in the form factor. You are really getting to the point of diminishing returns if you are chasing for more battery life than that.

 

[-Fran-]

So it's either Thunderbolt 4 or Intel gave Microsoft a VERY GOOD discount on those CPUs in some way.

Considering the other parts were also Intel in the Surface 4, there could be a "bulk buy" thing going on. Those WiFi+BT modules are expensive on their own, so there may be something there that AMD can't do with Realtek and, to be fair, those WiFi+BT modules from Realtek are garbage.

It makes for a good headline the fact the battery lasts less, for sure. Given the use case of these machines, the performance delta doesn't matter that much? I mean, if you want to edit stuff on the go, just get a Mac with the M1Pro and call it a day, I'd say?

Ah, it could also be a timing thing. The AMD APUs with RDNA2 aren't out yet and Microsoft probably (more than likely) didn't want a rebrand/refresh of good ol' Vega8. I'm sure they didn't want to pay for a custom APU either, so on that account, it would make sense that Intel has either better timing and/or lower bulk pricing. I think the timing part may be a bigger deal for MS to sway Intel's way.

EDIT: Oh, the new Ry 6K mobile series do have RDNA2 in them:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_Ik1vgIBN4


It performs quite well even... Hm...

EDIT2: This is more apples to apples

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK5T4SvTgeQ


Oh welp, just random thoughts on the matter.

Regards.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Yeah but the zen 3 6000 mobile series with RDNA2 graphics is much faster at the same power usage compared to 4000 series and idles at lower power levels so Microsoft’s decision seems like one of back door dealings reminiscent of old Intel. I would be all for Microsoft ditching AMD if Intel was faster AND same or more power efficient, but to be less power efficient in this market segment does not seem a logical choice unless Intel is trying their anti-competitive “discounts for Intel loyalty” offers again.

Yup, that's what I'm afraid of as well.

Given the way MS currently runs, I wouldn't be surprised if they accepted such deals.

 

[daworstplaya]

This smells like the whole Xbox console launch backdoor last minute deal all over again. Where Intel swoops in at the last minute and pushes the better competitor out.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Zen3 6000 series is still significantly slower in single thread than the Alder couterpart and there may not have been adequate stock available.
So it looks at least as likely that MS wanted a premium chip for their premium product, and wanted to be able to have that product available for sale as your "backdoor deals" theory.
Making a deal to put in a slower product in exchange for money is what you are accusing MS of doing here when it is just the opposite. That is likely what would be the case if they went with the inferior (except for low end gaming) AMD APU.
And note my first point: there are more efficient, and slower chips out there than both of these options. But almost 10 hours of continuous use isn't bad for top performance in the form factor. You are really getting to the point of diminishing returns if you are chasing for more battery life than that.

AMD 6800U beats the Intel 1260p in the majority of applications while sipping 25 watts vs 28 watts and even beats intel’s top of the line 12900HK 45 watt cpu in many applications. All while the AMD 6800U having 13% better battery life than the Intel 1260p.

I suggest watching this: thanks Fran for linking this

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK5T4SvTgeQ

 

[cyrusfox]

WiFi+BT modules are expensive

They are like $20... Not expensive at all

 

[-Fran-]

They are like $20... Not expensive at all

For the total BOM of the laptop, I'd say it is comparably higher than other components like the sound DAC, for instance. And Intel could give them away for free even and then charge more if you don't buy it with an Intel CPU.

Regards.

 

[prtskg]

Intel got a lot of money from US government and yet it's removing nearly 20k people from jobs because of low margin. Are we seeing some reasons for low margin here? Some 'development funds' being given to OEMs may decrease their margin.

 

[cyrusfox]

For the total BOM of the laptop, I'd say it is comparably higher than other components like the sound DAC, for instance. And Intel could give them away for free even and then charge more if you don't buy it with an Intel CPU.

Regards.

All the AMD laptops I bought came with Intel wifi and BT, and for sure they are getting them at a rebate of some amount when paired with an Intel CPU(I actually wonder if the OEMs get excess and move them in AMD laptops just to get out from the volume they have on hand). Intel Wireless tech is reliable and just works, Realtek is a bit more patchy in terms of quality(and drops). Not too many players in this space. I hate that killer is still around and Intel still thinks it is a valuable brand...

 

[fybyfyby]

If you used a 2w Atom the Atom's battery life would completely destroy the vastly faster Ryzen 4980. That chip can't even idle that low. But your laptop would suck because it is using a 2w Atom.
The largest difference is the faster (40% single, 30% multi, in cinebench) chip is using more power. As usual.
Maybe MS decided to upgrade their performance. Usually the faster chip uses more power.
Also did the handbrake test use quick sync? I think that is an option and it isn't unfair to enable a hardware advantage when doing a hardware comparison.

If you used 2W Atom, computer would be completely useless. Even lastgen Intel 4core cpus are bottlnecks in otherwise good surface products. If MS used 6800U, that would be completely different story. On the other hand these alder lake cpus are certainly better then last gens 1135G7, 1165G7 and 11300 and similar ones. Its a pitty MS abandoned AMD this time.

 

[rluker5]

AMD 6800U beats the Intel 1260p in the majority of applications while sipping 25 watts vs 28 watts and even beats intel’s top of the line 12900HK 45 watt cpu in many applications. All while the AMD 6800U having 13% better battery life than the Intel 1260p.

I suggest watching this: thanks Fran for linking this

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK5T4SvTgeQ

1255u is 15w, not 25 or 28w.
Single core is more important than multi in a 15w package and CB is not a good measure because it is an utterly unrealistic use for a thin ultrabook. PCmark10 would be a better measure of realistic, lighter ultrabook workloads since ultrabooks aren't workstations and using an ultrabook as a workstation is comparable to using an igpu in place of a dgpu. People do expect the premium ones to be responsive though.

Edit: Also the HWunboxed (also been pretty biased lately) showed the 6800u as on par with Tiger Lake in responsiveness with the PCmark10 app test. Tiger Lake is laggier than a 1255u.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

1255u is 15w, not 25 or 28w.
Single core is more important than multi in a 15w package and CB is not a good measure because it is an utterly unrealistic use for a thin ultrabook. PCmark10 would be a better measure of realistic, lighter ultrabook workloads since ultrabooks aren't workstations and using an ultrabook as a workstation is comparable to using an igpu in place of a dgpu. People do expect the premium ones to be responsive though.

Edit: Also the HWunboxed (also been pretty biased lately) showed the 6800u as on par with Tiger Lake in responsiveness with the PCmark10 app test. Tiger Lake is laggier than a 1255u.

PC mark 10 is a pointless benchmark, dell business machines from the mid 2000’s run MS office just fine (my old surface pro 3 is still speedy for all my office business needs) and web browsing and video playback are low compute power applications, I don’t see anything you said benefit from high single thread performance and ryzen 6800U is configurable to 15 watts and keeps its 4.7 ghz single core speed giving much greater capability to the platform while providing better battery life. Intel just can’t match AMD right now.

 

[rluker5]

PC mark 10 is a pointless benchmark, dell business machines from the mid 2000’s run MS office just fine (my old surface pro 3 is still speedy for all my office business needs) and web browsing and video playback are low compute power applications, I don’t see anything you said benefit from high single thread performance and ryzen 6800U is configurable to 15 watts and keeps its 4.7 ghz single core speed giving much greater capability to the platform while providing better battery life. Intel just can’t match AMD right now.

HWunboxed said the 6800u was a dog when it came to starting up applications. What are the typical users of these low power, sleek looking laptops going to use them for? Certainly not cinebench or igpu gaming. They will probably get them from employers to have remote access to work stuff. Edit/review documents, update inventories, production or timelines, meetings, access work data, etc. Not a ton of heavy use, but some cinebench/igpu specialty chip that is laggy in getting stuff going isn't the best choice here. It is just relatively good at things it is realistically bad at. 9700 cinebench23 multi is only good for a mobile device. Desktops are currently about 4x as fast. Igpu gaming?
If an employer is providing these he will want them to be reliably fast for what they are, seem premium and be able to be totally locked down from a security standpoint.
I don't know who is better at getting locked down tbh, but the provided Lenovos I see people at work running all have Intel. Maybe that is just some chicken/egg thing where AMD doesn't have much of a presence until it does. But still, laggy seems cheap and AMD just can't match Intel right now in this real world scenario.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

HWunboxed said the 6800u was a dog when it came to starting up applications. What are the typical users of these low power, sleek looking laptops going to use them for? Certainly not cinebench or igpu gaming. They will probably get them from employers to have remote access to work stuff. Edit/review documents, update inventories, production or timelines, meetings, access work data, etc. Not a ton of heavy use, but some cinebench/igpu specialty chip that is laggy in getting stuff going isn't the best choice here. It is just relatively good at things it is realistically bad at. 9700 cinebench23 multi is only good for a mobile device. Desktops are currently about 4x as fast. Igpu gaming?
If an employer is providing these he will want them to be reliably fast for what they are, seem premium and be able to be totally locked down from a security standpoint.
I don't know who is better at getting locked down tbh, but the provided Lenovos I see people at work running all have Intel. Maybe that is just some chicken/egg thing where AMD doesn't have much of a presence until it does. But still, laggy seems cheap and AMD just can't match Intel right now in this real world scenario.

Can you link that video cause I have never heard that or experienced that with my last gen 5800U ultrabook. All applications start up immediately and AMD’s superior decompression throughput would theoretically make remote access faster.

 

[rluker5]

Can you link that video cause I have never heard that or experienced that with my last gen 5800U ultrabook. All applications start up immediately and AMD’s superior decompression throughput would theoretically make remote access faster.

It's the video you posted. Shows the 6800u slower than the slowest Tiger Lake quad core i7 at doing smallish office/browsing tasks in pcmark10. We both know that as soon as there is a larger load the 8 cores will be much faster than what the smaller, older, inferior at decompression chip can do so it must take longer enough just to start doing anything that this is more than offset. I don't think the Ryzen is somehow incapable of opening a program or doing something like copy/paste or stuff like that.
I know this is a bit of conjecture, but being slow in starting things is laggy. My 7700hq laptop is slower at starting small things than weaker old desktops and it feels laggy. It is noticeable when you have a comparison pc.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

It's the video you posted. Shows the 6800u slower than the slowest Tiger Lake quad core i7 at doing smallish office/browsing tasks in pcmark10. We both know that as soon as there is a larger load the 8 cores will be much faster than what the smaller, older, inferior at decompression chip can do so it must take longer enough just to start doing anything that this is more than offset. I don't think the Ryzen is somehow incapable of opening a program or doing something like copy/paste or stuff like that.
I know this is a bit of conjecture, but being slow in starting things is laggy. My 7700hq laptop is slower at starting small things than weaker old desktops and it feels laggy. It is noticeable when you have a comparison pc.

I don’t see any difference in office or browsing between my Intel surface pro 3, 5800U ultrabook, or my 5950x desktop. MS office is built to be run on bottom of the barrel business machines, and browsing is so low power that an atom chip will perform just fine. IE PCMark 10 is a useless benchmark. You are grasping at straws in my opinion but to each their own.

 

[cyrusfox]

If an employer is providing these he will want them to be reliably fast for what they are, seem premium and be able to be totally locked down from a security standpoint.
I don't know who is better at getting locked down tbh, but the provided Lenovos I see people at work running all have Intel.

It's called vPro for Intel it has a vast presence with tools geared to Enterprise(e.g. 0 touch deployment). AMD is trying to break in to this enterprise market with Ryzen Pro, it doesn't have all the same features yet and has a ways to go to establish itself among Corporate IT.