Corsair RM1200X SHIFT 1200W PSU Review
Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
AMD Ryzen 7 Extreme Edition Spotted - 8 cores - 4.3 GHz - 15 Watts Ultra-portable?
The news never stops for and from AMD is seems. This round the UL ORB is listing a reather curious tagged processor from AMD,. a Ryzen 7 Extreme edition?
Thai PC aficionado TUM_APISAK stumbled into it, and claims this might be a "Renoir" based product. If you look at the base clock of 1.80 GHz we're inclined to say it has to be a mobile part. However, it can boost all the way up to 4.30 GHz. The processor gets 8 cores and 16 threads enabled for SMT. This "Extreme Edition" processor looks to be running 100 MHz faster seen from the Ryzen 7 4800U, which is locked in at 15-Watt for TDP with a 4.20 GHz max boost. Yeah, TDP is a flexible thing these days. Fast ultra-portable anyone?
AMD Ryzen 7 4700G Renoir spotted, 8c/16t and Vega'ish Integrated GPU - 05/10/2020 03:09 PM
If you have read our Ryzen 3100 and 3300X reviews, you will have noticed that one of my arguments was that these procs likely would have been better off if they'd had an IGP (integrated graphics proc...
Lenovo Launches ThinkPad Laptops Powered by AMD Ryzen PRO 4000 - 05/08/2020 08:23 AM
Selected ThinkPad T, X and L series powered by AMD Ryzen PRO 4000 Series Mobile Processors announced in February are coming very soon. Delivering smarter IT innovations for better user experiences, th...
Review: AMD Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X processors - Quad Core Galore - 05/07/2020 03:00 PM
Today we're reviewing a series of quad-core processors as released by AMD. The Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X that we test bring is back a few years in time, where quad-cores were the norm. These, however, a...
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X Has a fully enabled CCX, unlike the Ryzen 3 3100 - 04/24/2020 05:15 PM
This week AMD announced two entry-level quad-core processors, the Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X. The difference between the two 4-core / 8-thread parts, however, is to be found in the way how the active pro...
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X Single Core Cinebench 15 Score Leaks - 04/23/2020 01:13 PM
It is not much to go with, but a Ryzen 3 3300X Single thread/core Cinebench 15 score leaked onto the web by a Redditor with a fairly awesome nickname. ...
JonasBeckman
Senior Member
Posts: 17563
Joined: 2009-02-25
Senior Member
Posts: 17563
Joined: 2009-02-25
#5787477 Posted on: 05/11/2020 03:19 PM
It looks more impressive to stick the stock wattage in the presentation I suppose. Marketing and all that instead of 15w and up or just actually typing out the typical load power draw or wattage under normal non stress-test conditions but as far as I know both Intel and AMD has variants of how they specify CPU voltage and average power draw or just near idle wattage consumption and none of it is generally the boost speed even if the CPU spends most of it's time around this instead of the stock speeds.
(Can still do various power saving modes and operations to lower consumption but typical operating values will differ.)
And then reviewers have to go and test the CPU in various conditions and get the actual value unless it's written out somewhere else in very small text or something.
EDIT: Not bad though.
I mean the default listed wattage is what 65w or something I think for a current-gen Ryzen7 CPU model.
3700X octa core specifically and then that base speed would be 3.6 Ghz now halved to 1.8 here.
Suppose the power draw and curve is pretty efficient when scaled down further if they can keep around 15 - 20w at that speed.
Although it can still boost and then we'll see what that gets and how AMD is controlling this CPU model for what it gets without any bios adjustments or further overclock changes.
(Average clocks and then the higher shorter periods of bursts which I assume is where it can then hit the 4 Ghz speeds.)
It looks more impressive to stick the stock wattage in the presentation I suppose. Marketing and all that instead of 15w and up or just actually typing out the typical load power draw or wattage under normal non stress-test conditions but as far as I know both Intel and AMD has variants of how they specify CPU voltage and average power draw or just near idle wattage consumption and none of it is generally the boost speed even if the CPU spends most of it's time around this instead of the stock speeds.
(Can still do various power saving modes and operations to lower consumption but typical operating values will differ.)
And then reviewers have to go and test the CPU in various conditions and get the actual value unless it's written out somewhere else in very small text or something.
EDIT: Not bad though.
I mean the default listed wattage is what 65w or something I think for a current-gen Ryzen7 CPU model.
3700X octa core specifically and then that base speed would be 3.6 Ghz now halved to 1.8 here.
Suppose the power draw and curve is pretty efficient when scaled down further if they can keep around 15 - 20w at that speed.
Although it can still boost and then we'll see what that gets and how AMD is controlling this CPU model for what it gets without any bios adjustments or further overclock changes.
(Average clocks and then the higher shorter periods of bursts which I assume is where it can then hit the 4 Ghz speeds.)
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 1678
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 1678
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5787481 Posted on: 05/11/2020 03:35 PM
No... it's not 15W. 1.8GHz is why they call it 15W, but as long as the CPU get a chance to boost higher than that, the wattage is going to skyrocket.
I don't understand why we can't just get more realistic numbers (especially from Intel...). When it comes to mobile, wattage is more important than performance, otherwise I'd just get a desktop CPU.
I don't mind if its TDP. The TDP rating seems to be working fine as laptops are getting cooled properly. What I would like to see is another stat that represents actual power draw just for transparency sake. Once you get into desktop chips the TDP's start to become almost meaningless.
No... it's not 15W. 1.8GHz is why they call it 15W, but as long as the CPU get a chance to boost higher than that, the wattage is going to skyrocket.
I don't understand why we can't just get more realistic numbers (especially from Intel...). When it comes to mobile, wattage is more important than performance, otherwise I'd just get a desktop CPU.
I don't mind if its TDP. The TDP rating seems to be working fine as laptops are getting cooled properly. What I would like to see is another stat that represents actual power draw just for transparency sake. Once you get into desktop chips the TDP's start to become almost meaningless.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 7434
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 7434
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5787483 Posted on: 05/11/2020 03:54 PM
Well even for cooling purposes it is misleading, since 4.3GHz isn't sustainable for very long. But yes, actual power draw would be much appreciated too.
I don't mind if its TDP. The TDP rating seems to be working fine as laptops are getting cooled properly. What I would like to see is another stat that represents actual power draw just for transparency sake. Once you get into desktop chips the TDP's start to become almost meaningless.
Well even for cooling purposes it is misleading, since 4.3GHz isn't sustainable for very long. But yes, actual power draw would be much appreciated too.
kakiharaFRS
Senior Member
Posts: 965
Joined: 2015-11-21
Senior Member
Posts: 965
Joined: 2015-11-21
#5787484 Posted on: 05/11/2020 03:57 PM
the only realistic power figures are the coolers since they use a hot plate with static 100% accurate (voltage x current) Watts
if you still care about TDP please check gamer nexus article and video
my point of view
intel has lower idle power thanks to it's better idle management
amd has lower 100% cpu usage power thx to it's advanced tech
amd has a huge margin to enhance their idle which is crap currently (maybe that's what this 1.7->4.3 is meant to improve)
intel can't hardly do something to reduce their max power, very curious about the trickery they seem to have attempted in the 10'xxx series
the only realistic power figures are the coolers since they use a hot plate with static 100% accurate (voltage x current) Watts
if you still care about TDP please check gamer nexus article and video
my point of view
intel has lower idle power thanks to it's better idle management
amd has lower 100% cpu usage power thx to it's advanced tech
amd has a huge margin to enhance their idle which is crap currently (maybe that's what this 1.7->4.3 is meant to improve)
intel can't hardly do something to reduce their max power, very curious about the trickery they seem to have attempted in the 10'xxx series
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7434
Joined: 2012-11-10
No... it's not 15W. 1.8GHz is why they call it 15W, but as long as the CPU get a chance to boost higher than that, the wattage is going to skyrocket.
I don't understand why we can't just get more realistic numbers (especially from Intel...). When it comes to mobile, wattage is more important than performance, otherwise I'd just get a desktop CPU.