4c/8c at 15tdp whuuut

My guess is 12nm Zen+.

Gonna need more information on how this works at 35tdp & 15tdp?

Product Model Cores/ Threads TDP Boost/Base Freq. Radeon Graphics GPU Cores Max GPU Freq. L2+L3 Cache AMD Ryzen™ 7 3750H 4C/8T 35W 4.0/2.3 GHz Vega 10 1400 MHz 6MB AMD Ryzen™ 7 3700U 4C/8T 15W 4.0/2.3 GHz Vega 10 1400 MHz 6MB

Fox2232:

My guess is 12nm Zen+.

Correct, to clarify, this is 12nm Zen+ under the 3000 series naming. So this is not the pending 7nm ZEN2.

Some Bench Results from AMD website: Testing conducted by AMD performance labs as of 12/02/2018. Cinebench R15 nT ("CPU"): Core i5-8250U vs. Ryzen™ 5 3500U: 524 vs. 651 (24%/1.24X faster for AMD) Core i7-8565U vs. Ryzen™ 7 3700U: 619 vs. 688 (11%/1.11X faster for AMD) 3DMark® Time Spy ("GPU"): Core i5-8250U vs. Ryzen™ 5 3500U: 399 vs. 907 (127%/2.27X faster for AMD) Core i7-8565U vs. Ryzen™ 7 3700U: 444 vs. 967 (118%/2.18X faster for AMD) Core i7-8565U Test System: Dell Inspiron 7586, 2x4GB DDR4-2400, Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Intel Graphics HD 620 (driver 24.20.100.6287), Windows® 10 Pro x64 (build 1803). Core i5-8250U Test System: HP Spectre 13t, 2x4GB LPDDR4-2133, Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Intel Graphics HD 620 (driver 24.20.100.6287), Windows® 10 Pro x64 (build 1803). AMD Ryzen™ Test System: AMD Reference Motherboard, 2x4GB DDR4-2400, Radeon™ Vega 10 Graphics (driver 18.41-181105a), Windows® 10 Pro x64 (build 1803). Results may vary with configuration and drivers. https://www.amd.com/en/press-releases/2019-01-06-amd-kicks-2019-offering-complete-mobile-portfolio-new-ryzen-athlon-and-a *FOOTNOTES:

I would say a strong line of AMD cpus, let's jut hope for a broader OEM adoption.

I do really wish that AMD (and intel for that matter) would keep the same architecture within the name naming. Mobile 2000 series should have been 1000, and 3000 series, should have been 2000. It's just confusing otherwise.

Aura89:

I do really wish that AMD (and intel for that matter) would keep the same architecture within the name naming. Mobile 2000 series should have been 1000, and 3000 series, should have been 2000. It's just confusing otherwise.

For normal consumers it doesn't matter, they just go for higher numbers, so that makes it good marketing. For people like us it doesn't matter, we know more about the chips than the manufacturers that include them in their laptops.

Battery Life looks promising: https://hwzone.co.il/community/uploads/monthly_2019_01/3700u.thumb.JPG.d9aa3688231ced1ec1bd8ec5049d40aa.JPG

FrostNixon:

For normal consumers it doesn't matter, they just go for higher numbers, so that makes it good marketing. For people like us it doesn't matter, we know more about the chips than the manufacturers that include them in their laptops.

For normal consumers its borderline fraud, since they expect that "3rd gen(3000) ryzen" is actually 3rd gen ryzen, when it's not. For people like us, it's infuriating because we have to actually do research to make sure which processor we are getting is the technology we want.

I have spotted 3700U entery in 3dmark: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/13137137 https://i.postimg.cc/QM5b9Szy/3700U.jpg

Aura89:

For normal consumers its borderline fraud, since they expect that "3rd gen(3000) ryzen" is actually 3rd gen ryzen, when it's not. For people like us, it's infuriating because we have to actually do research to make sure which processor we are getting is the technology we want.

Well, these were announced at 2nd Gen Ryzen 3000 mobile processors..... So, where's the confusion?

sykozis:

Well, these were announced at 2nd Gen Ryzen 3000 mobile processors..... So, where's the confusion?

Your question doesn't make sense. You're asking that like its not even more confusing. "Hey! Here's some 1st gen, 2nd gen and 3rd gen processors! 1000, 2000 and 3000 respectively! And here's some 1st gen 2nd gen mobile processors and some 2nd gen 3rd gen mobile processors, 2000 and 3000 respectively!" Makes no sense. The X000 marks the generation, so to say 2nd gen 3000 processors should be redundant, except they are forcing it not to be, because the 3rd gen 3000 ryzen processors have nothing to do with the 3000 mobile processors. Its just confusing and borderline fraud and completely unnecessary.

Aura89:

Your question doesn't make sense. You're asking that like its not even more confusing. "Hey! Here's some 1st gen, 2nd gen and 3rd gen processors! 1000, 2000 and 3000 respectively! And here's some 1st gen 2nd gen mobile processors and some 2nd gen 3rd gen mobile processors, 2000 and 3000 respectively!" Makes no sense. The X000 marks the generation, so to say 2nd gen 3000 processors should be redundant, except they are forcing it not to be, because the 3rd gen 3000 ryzen processors have nothing to do with the 3000 mobile processors. Its just confusing and borderline fraud and completely unnecessary.

You are right in sentiment and wrong in depiction 😀 Zen => 1st Gen => 1X00 desktop => 2X00U mobile (much later) Zen+ => 2nd Gen => 2X00 desktops => 3X00U mobile (now) Zen2 => 3rd Gen => 3X00 desktops (in next 6 months) => not even manufacturing capacity on 7nm It may bring certain level of technical confusion. But Those who may be confused are not being cheated. Those people in general do not pay to have 7nm chip. Those expect certain battery life and hopefully performance. Intel for years decided that they can get away with 2C/4T even in i7 category. Ryzen did change it and intel for some time sells proper 4C/8T in mobile. And even then mobile Zen was not bad at all. Actually compared Watt to Watt those were equal. Yes, I wrote that 7nm Zen2 chips would wipe intel from face of notebooks in terms of mindshare (AMD does not have volume to do actual wiping), but Zen+ is quite sufficient to deliver good performance/watt especially if it comes from GloFo's tweaked 12(14)nm. It is similar to Polaris... RX-480 started with base clock 1120MHz and could barely clock above 1300MHz. RX-580 started at 1260MHz and today you buy variants with boosts ~1430MHz. RX-590 has base clock of 1470MHz and boosts to 1560~1600MHz. Yet all 3 variants are same GPU with same chip dimensions (transistor density), just on differently evolved/tweaked manufacturing process. (480 made by TSMC. 580 and 590 by GLoFo.) Does anyone remember what GloFo said about canning 7nm? They went to improve 14nm instead. Therefore, if we expect 3X00Us to be made by GloFo as were 2X00Us, I would not be afraid. I am actually interested to see what they can do. (+Is there going to be price bump on 3700U caused by manufacturing cost? Unlikely => Better prices for end customer, higher profit for AMD.) And it should be noted that not only 15W parts are announced, but 35W too. Last time 35W got announced too late and did not see light of the world. Now both are announced at same time.