Discussion New latop processor dilema

[cpodgey]

Hi, I am currently looking around for a new laptop and have rounded it down to the following two:

https://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/compu...eals~Communities & UGC~47868~Pepper+Deals+Ltd

and

https://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/compu...l-core-i7-512-gb-ssd-silver-10198863-pdt.html

so its between a AMD Ryzen 5 3500U Processor and Intel® Core™ i7-1065G7 Processor

Ive built PC's some time ago but the processors have leaped forward since last needing to compare and choose one, that is the only thing im unsure of and need some guidance on.

Ive looked here and it states that the intel is better https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-3500U-vs-Intel-i7-1065G7/3421vs3466

I have a few questions based on some information ive already been told:

1. The intel idle clock is much lower, is this just to save power? - I dont know how it can be so much better that the Ryzen which sits at 2.1 GHz vs 1.3 GHz
2. The intel will only boost one of the cores to that speed where as the Ryzen will boost all cores?
3. Are the lower base speeds just to save power and the chip will generally run faster when used?
4. Is it better to have a processor that has a higher base frequency or higher turbo?
5. The cache is different between the 2 chips, would that have a impact on my usage plans for the laptop?

I aim to use this laptop for uni so programming so wanted to make sure I had a decent laptop for this as one of the programs is quite intense for compiling, each of these will easily run the program but im after something that will cut down the time.

Any advice or information is much appreciated! Hope i've made sense!

Thanks in advacne

 

[sizzling]

You just can’t compare CPU’s by looking at the specs unless they are the same generation & series from the same manufacturer. There are too many other variables. You need to compare by looking at reviews and benchmarks.

 

[cpodgey]

So to answer my questions, is it not easy to compare or recommend a cpu based on its base frequency?

What I would really like to know also is it better to have a cpu sitting at a higher base rate?

Was my question true on the tubo boost that intel only boost one core where ryzen 5 will boost all 4 if needed?

I have been looking at benchmarks and reviews but need some guidance/advice

Thanks

 

[Obakasama]

Comparing things like frequency makes sense in a direct comparison between processors of the same family. You'd get a fair direct comparison between, eg, an i5-8400 and an i7-8700k. You'd also get a fair idea, even with an i5-8400 and an i9-9900k though there will be more changes between generations.

Between AMD and Intel it's trickier, so benchmarks will provide the closest to a fair comparison. Is it easy to compare based on just frequency? I'd say no.

Intel CPUs will boost all cores when needed, but usually less than the maximum single core boost.

Ultimately... what are you using the laptop for?

 

[cpodgey]

So you couldnt compare between the chips that the base frequency has a difference of over 1ghz?

Is it better to have a cpu sitting at a higher base frequency that one which is much lower? - Looking at the speeds alone the turbo on each is similar, just the base clock is much lower on the intel and I want to know if that will cause me problems?

Will the AMD boost all cores to the turbo?

I will be using the laptop for programming via visual studo and using quarterus prime for compiling FPGA circuits.

 

[Obakasama]

You can compare anything to anything; you just have to be aware of the criteria of the comparison and how 'fair' the comparison is. As mentioned, benchmarks are supposed to be a fair way of comparing; but even then it's for a very specific task usually. It's why the usual advice is to seek benchmarks for the software you're using.

For idling as far as I'm concerned it's about electrical draw. There are always things going on in the background so no CPU is truly idle (unless it's turned off), and clockspeed adjusts accordingly to the workload required of it. I'm not sure what sort of problems you're expecting; at the very least I've not experienced problems when a CPU is on low usage.

Personally would imagine the HP would be better suited for your needs.

 

[cpodgey]

Thanks Obakasama for your help. I'm just trying to understand the subtle differenced between the CPU on the market these days.

So just going back to the boos features between Intel and AMD, is the AMD able to boost all cores to the top speed if needed and the Intel almost can? Sorry for all the questions, I just want to get my head around these points.

So looking at the choice of processor I have, I would not be likely to see any difference between the CPU even though the usual clock speed of the intel is much lower?

Cheers

 

[Obakasama]

Not too familiar with the boost behaviours, which is why I haven't addressed them. 😀 What I do know from memory is that Intel CPU will still boost on all cores but at a lower clockspeed. What they advertise their boost clocks to be would require a bit of intricate reading of the respective companies' marketing material.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-5-3500u
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...1065g7-processor-8m-cache-up-to-3-90-ghz.html

Note that AMD's spec states "up to" which could mean the 3.7GHz figure is single core boost.
Intel's spec maximum boost is the single core boost.

Neither seem to provide figures for all core boost, though I would speculate it's as much to do with varying differences from chip to chip as anything.

There will be differences between the CPUs. Notably there might be differences in instruction sets (not too familiar with them) for certain workloads. Suppose a worst case scenario where a piece of software requires an instruction set to be more efficient, and one of the CPUs doesn't have it. (I think there was something similar to this with the game Mass Effect on older AMD CPUs leading to a black face bug.)

The other aspect in terms of performance yet to be mentioned is IPC (Instructions Per Clock). This is why comparing frequency alone is somewhat fraught with difficulty. Suppose CPU A completes 1 instruction per clock, and CPU B completes 2 per clock. However, CPU A runs at 2 Hz and CPU B runs at 1 Hz. All else being the same CPU A and CPU B do the same amount of work in the same length of time.

As a generality, Intel has had better IPC for many CPU generations over AMD. It seems only now has AMD been competitive on this front for the first time in many years (Zen 2 specifically or the vast majority of the Ryzen 3000 series).

With that in mind, it's why I think the HP is likely a better choice. There is probably one last thing which niggles in my mind though I don't know if that would be true for the laptops in question.

 

[cpodgey]

Thanks for the in depth response! There is just something unsettling about the low base speed on the Intel chip. It doesn't seem right, I assume it is in theory more efficient with its energy use.

I can't fully explain what I mean but the amd has a much higher base speed and can boost quite high but then on the flipside has less cache. How would that figure with this choice too?
1.3ghz sounds low but with the technology can it stay at 2-3ghz for long periods if needed? Something which the amd would be able to as it sits at a higher clock speed when "idle"

 

[Obakasama]

Not familiar with cache behaviour and usage, so hopefully someone can address those concerns. What limited understanding I have of it is something to do with the precise nature of the workload, I think.

As for the actual clocks while in usage I'd say there's nothing to worry about. While in usage the CPU's various cores/thread clockspeed will fluctuate throughout the workload accordingly. If it only needs 2GHz, then it'll boost and sustain it for as long as needed (or physically possible). Generally, I don't think the clockspeed boost behaviour is something to worry about.

The worry is whether maximum boost clocks can be safely sustained for the duration needed, because it will produce the most heat. Heat isn't an issue if the CPU is adequately cooled, and this can be an issue for laptop design. (I think one of the Macbooks had the issue of having a powerful CPU but in no real world circumstance could it ever boost to maximum clocks due to overheating.)