In the mobile computing market, in recent years, AMD Ryzen mobile platform relies on innovative core architecture and advanced manufacturing technology, with excellent energy efficiency performance and excellent performance has been widely recognized by the market and users, and has taken a lot of shares by leaps and bounds, causing a lot of impact on Intel. However, Intel has been working in this field for many years, and the ecological advantages are also very obvious, and it has also come up with strong products to respond to AMD's challenges. So, for business users who pursue thin and light mobile office, who should AMD and Intel choose? This issue of the article will solve the puzzle for everyone through the actual combat PK.
What should efficient business be?
The Ryzen™ 7 5800U has advantages over the Core i7 1167G7 in terms of manufacturing process, power control, L3 cache capacity, and core/thread count
If you still think that the performance of business thin and light only needs to meet the daily codewords, PP charts, and applications of making tables, it is too outdated. Considering the current widespread application of content creative applications such as video editing, even business offices may involve related work, which puts forward higher requirements for the performance of business thin and light books. Of course, this is not to require the business thin instinct to meet the needs of high-intensity productivity, but anytime, anywhere can quickly edit or modify the short video, deal with some visual design work, but also to provide more possibilities for business cooperation, and now such application scenarios have indeed become commonplace, and this is also the advantage of the business light and thin book itself.
So back to the topic of business thin and light choice A or choose I. From the perspective of products in the market, the business thin and light cost of the latest Ryzen™ 5000U platform has a price advantage of about 10% compared with the Intel platform in the case of the same level configuration, in addition, the AMD platform not only has advantages in the number of processor cores at the same price point, but also has better performance in power control and endurance due to architectural advantages and the use of 7nm advanced technology. In intel, the 11th generation Core low-voltage mobile platform corresponding to the Ryzen™ 5000U platform requires a higher power consumption setting if it wants to exert performance comparable to the Ryzen™ 5000U, which is bound to have a negative impact on battery life. Of course, in the case of heat dissipation and power consumption settings do not cause bottlenecks, the Intel platform not only has outstanding single-core performance, but also the hardware acceleration performance of the nuclear display in video codec is also relatively excellent, which does have certain advantages.
Since both AMD and Intel platforms have their own advantages, let's compare them with actual tests to see who performs better in business applications. In terms of test models, we chose the popular products of the same brand and series of A and I platforms, the two 15.6-inch business thin and light books are equipped with flagship AMD Ryzen™ 7 5800U and Intel Core i7 1165G7 processors, the memory is DDR4 3200 8GB×2, both equipped with 512GB NVMe SSDs, other aspects including heat dissipation design and configuration are also the same (the price is 5199 yuan and 5799 yuan, respectively, The AMD platform has a price advantage of 600 yuan), so the difference in performance and battery life between the two notebooks mainly comes from the processor, which makes it easier for us to compare.
Round 1: Comparison of everyday office applications
The Ryzen™ 7 5800U platform excels in terms of overall office performance, with Word and Excel performing better.
The Core i7 1165G7 platform has a slight advantage in PowerPoint, with Edge web browsing almost equal to the Ryzen 5 5800U, and the overall score is also lower than the Ryzen 5 5800U.
In the 7-Zip test, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U with more cores/threads has a significant advantage, 69% ahead of the opponent
Since it is a thin and light business, the application of daily office must not be less. PCMark10 application testing includes the office common suites and web browsing practical application content, which can more comprehensively reflect the comprehensive performance of notebooks in completing daily office work. Judging from the test results, the Ryzen™ 5 5800U platform score is smaller than the Core i7 1165G7 platform, while from the sub-score, the Ryzen 5800U is better in terms of word and Excel processing efficiency. The Core i7 1165G7 scored slightly higher in PPT processing, and Edge web browsing was basically flat. In general, from the comprehensive score point, the experience gap between the two sets of platforms in the daily office is not too obvious, after all, the daily office is still a relatively lightweight application, and the pressure is not large for the processors of the two flagship light and thin platforms, and they can easily cope. As a common compression/decompression tool in the office, 7-Zip can support processor multithreading very well, so the greater the number of processor cores/threads, the more efficient the compression/decompression. From the test, it can be seen that the Ryzen™ 7 5800U with 8 cores and 16 threads is much faster than the 4 core 8 threads Core i7 1165G7, with an advantage of up to 69%, which is also difficult for the Core i7 1165G7 to match. On the whole, in the daily office application, the two sets of platform experience is relatively close, Ryzen™ 7 5800U is a little better, but if it involves heavy applications that support multi-threading, such as common file compression/decompression, the advantages of the Ryzen 7 5800U will be fully reflected, providing much higher than the execution efficiency of the Core i7 1165G7.
Round 2: Video encoding output comparison
The Ryzen™ 7 5800U pure processor encoding time is 8 minutes and 59 seconds
Core i7 1165G7 pure processor encoding time is 10 minutes and 58 seconds
In the current mainstream business office applications, most of the time there will also be some content creative design work, including video clips. However, this kind of work often impresses everyone with the speed at which the video is finally exported, and if the notebook performance is insufficient, the long wait is really maddening. We know that the current video editing software can choose to use the processor pure software calculation for video encoding, or you can choose to use the GPU's video encoder + general-purpose calculation to accelerate the encoding. However, although the GPU can accelerate the video encoding, but in terms of output picture quality and processor pure software coding has a certain gap, for the pursuit of video picture quality users, of course, will choose the processor pure software encoding method. Of course, the more cores/threads the processor pure software coding efficiency, so the 8-core/16-thread Ryzen™ 7 5800U is very convenient in this convenience advantage.
Our tests used Media Encoder software, first selecting to turn off the GPU hardware encoder in the settings, and also turning off the GPU's OpenCL universal computing acceleration to ensure that only the processor software code is used. From the test results, it can be seen that the same video is encoded, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U took 8 minutes and 59 seconds, while the Core i7 1165G7 took 10 minutes and 58 seconds, the gap is very large, and the Ryzen 7 5800U has an overwhelming advantage.
Of course, in addition to the advantage in the number of cores/threads, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U actually takes the lead in terms of performance release. We know that Ryzen 7 5800U uses Zen3 architecture and 7nm manufacturing process, power consumption and temperature control are more advantageous, so it is more advantageous when the performance is released for a long time, and the full core can run out of about 26W of power for a long time when the full core is fully loaded; and in the case of the same heat dissipation mold, the Core i7 1165G7 can burst to more than 49W in the initial stage of full load, but after a short turbo frequency burst period, subject to temperature, it will quickly decrease to less than 20W, and the performance will naturally drop rapidly. This will be more pronounced in later tests of 3D render output.
After fully enabling built-in GPU acceleration, the encoding time of the Ryzen™ 7 5800U is 3 minutes and 38 seconds
After fully enabling built-in GPU acceleration, the Core i7 1165G7 has an encoding time of 3 minutes and 10 seconds
Of course, as a thin and light processor with built-in kernel display, we also compared the coding efficiency of the two after turning on GPU acceleration. From the test results, it can be seen that the Core i7 1165G7 equipped with the iRIS core display has a GPU encoding blessing, and the efficiency has indeed improved, which is about 15% faster than the Ryzen 7 5800U plus the Radeon Vega core display, but don't forget that this is at the expense of sacrificing a part of the picture quality, and after turning on the VBR secondary option in the output setting, the GPU hardware encoding cannot be used, and the VBR secondary is often the most reasonable way to video encoding output. It can avoid the problem that the VBR is inaccurate in calculating the clarity of the video screen at one time. So, on the whole, processor-only software video encoding is the best choice for image quality performance, and the Ryzen™ 7 5800U has a huge advantage over the Core i7 1165G7 in this regard.
Round 3: 3D rendering output performance comparison
Rendering output after 3D modeling is also a very common application for creative design work that business users are often exposed to, and such applications are very sensitive to the number of cores/threads of the processor, that is, the multi-threaded performance of the processor. In this regard, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U with 8 cores and 16 threads clearly has more advantages than the Core i7 1165G7 with 4 cores and 8 threads. As can be seen from the tests, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U is about twice as fast as the Core i7 1165G7 in all projects, and even 123% faster in Corona, and the two are not at all one level.
The Ryzen™ 7 5800U performs better at temperature and power consumption over long periods of time rendering, and the Core i7 1165G7 even hits a temperature wall
In addition, in the test, we also found that the Core i7 1165G7 rendered the initial burst power consumption reached more than 49W, the temperature once hit the temperature wall, and the power consumption remained at the beginning of 18W after the explosion. The Ryzen™ 7 5800U initially exploded at nearly 30W and remained in its early 16W. From the perspective of the entire rendering process, the power consumption performance of the Ryzen 7 5800U is lower than that of the Core i7 1165G7, and the efficiency of the final rendering is twice as high as that of the Core i7 1165G7, which shows that in terms of energy efficiency ratio, the Zen3 architecture and the 7nm manufacturing process support the Ryzen™ 7 5800U do have an overwhelming advantage.
As you can see from the previous tests, if the user wants to use the business thin and light to complete some lightweight 3D rendering work, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U is obviously a much stronger choice.
Round 4: Endurance Competition
In terms of battery life, we turned on the energy-saving mode in the power management uniformly, and then carried out the actual online network video continuous playback test (the screen brightness is set to 70% and the volume is set to 60%). In this test, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U platform lasted 10 hours and 20 minutes, and the Core i7 1165G7 only lasted 8 hours and 59 minutes, and the Ryzen platform had obvious advantages. Of course, continuous video playback is still relatively special compared to everyday applications, so we also used PCMark's modern office battery life test, which in addition to running the Office suite, also simulates the state of user rest and notebook standby, so it is more in line with the actual application. Judging from the test results, the endurance time of the Ryzen 7 5800U platform is as high as 12 hours and 15 minutes, which is significantly more than the 10 hours and 58 minutes of the Core i7 1165G7 platform, and the endurance advantage is indeed obvious, which is not unrelated to the Ryzen 5000U using the innovative Zen3 architecture core and 7nm advanced manufacturing process. In general, in the business office application environment that requires a long endurance, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U business thin and light cost has obvious advantages, and it is indeed worth giving priority to.
Summary: The performance is more efficient across the board, and the Ryzen™ 7 5800U business book is more worth choosing
As can be seen from the previous PK tests, the Ryzen 7 5800U platform with Zen3 architecture and 7nm advanced manufacturing process has a higher energy efficiency ratio, a better temperature and power consumption control level, and the most important thing is that it has 8 cores and 16 threads, which obviously has much stronger multi-thread performance than 4 cores and 8 threads, and the efficiency in the creative design of content such as video processing and 3D rendering output is about twice that of core i7 1165G7, and for business thin and light users, Undoubtedly, it is equivalent to providing a more comprehensive and efficient solution. Business users choose to use the Ryzen™ 7 5800U platform business thin and light cost, not only in a variety of office applications can get much higher efficiency, but also because of the lower processor operating temperature (not hot hands, no hot knees... ), longer battery life for a better use experience. Therefore, on the whole, in the case of the same configuration, the Ryzen™ 7 5800U business light and thin book is more worthy of choice than the competitive platform.