This summary of the video was created by an AI. It might contain some inaccuracies.
00:00:00 – 00:16:07
In this video, the host thoroughly compares the performance of mid-range processors from Intel and AMD across various applications, games, and power scenarios, using Lenovo Legion Slim 5 gaming laptops. Key findings include Intel's advantage in multicore performance and gaming at higher power levels, while AMD demonstrates superior power efficiency and consistent performance at lower wattages. Tests showed minor differences in gaming performance between Intel’s Core i7-13700H and AMD’s Ryzen 7 7840HS, with Intel slightly ahead overall. AMD, however, provided better battery life and value for cost per frame. Both CPUs showcased strengths in different applications, with Intel excelling in video encoding and AMD in compiling tasks. Ultimately, while Intel may offer a slight edge in certain high-power scenarios, AMD's efficiency, battery performance, and cost-effectiveness make it a strong contender, especially for those prioritizing battery life and multi-core tasks. The video concludes that the choice between Intel and AMD should be based on specific needs and budget, with a recommendation for the Lenovo Legion Slim 5 as a robust mid-range gaming laptop option.
00:00:00
In this part of the video, the host compares current mid-range processors from Intel and AMD, focusing on 25 games and applications, thermals, power draw, and battery life. Intel’s 13th gen offers more total cores and threads due to its hybrid design with higher power performance and lower power efficiency cores, while both CPUs have similar single core turbo boost speeds, but the i7 has more cache. Intel’s i7 supports DDR5-5200 memory, whereas Ryzen 7 can run DDR5-5600. The host performed tests using two identical Lenovo Legion Slim 5 gaming laptops, only differing in CPUs, to ensure fairness.
Gigabyte sponsored this segment, introducing their updated Aorus gaming laptops with Nvidia’s GeForce RTX 40 series graphics and the newly updated Aero series for content creators. The host notes that AMD still maintains an edge in battery life but with a reduced lead compared to previous years, with Intel lasting over 7 hours and 40 minutes in a YouTube video test. Performance on battery power is highlighted, showing AMD’s advantage in maintaining performance without a charger. The video also explains the impact of power limits on CPU performance using Lenovo’s Vantage software, demonstrating this with power limit tests on Intel’s 13700H and AMD’s 7840HS CPUs.
00:03:00
In this part of the video, the comparison between AMD and Intel CPUs focuses on power efficiency and performance across different power limits. It is shown that AMD outperforms Intel in workloads with 90 watts or less, highlighting AMD’s superior power efficiency. Typical power consumption for CPUs in thinner laptops ranges between 50 to 60 watts, while 15-inch models often use 80 to 90 watts, with 100 watts plus being exclusive to high-end machines. Tests were conducted at 50 and 85 watts, revealing that both CPUs are close in single-core performance, but Intel pulls ahead in multicore at higher power levels. Interestingly, the AMD laptop ran warmer than the Intel laptop at both power levels, with the Ryzen processor reaching higher clock speeds due to fewer cores. In terms of power usage, Intel used slightly more power but maintained a cooler temperature, giving it a similar performance per watt value at 85 watts, though AMD proved more efficient at lower wattage. Linux kernel and LLVM compilation were faster on AMD, even as Intel closed the gap at higher power limits. In Windows tests, Handbrake video encoding was on par at 50 watts, with Intel gaining speed with higher power. The Corona renderer test showed minimal gains for AMD from 50 to 85 watts, while Intel saw a significant performance increase.
00:06:00
In this part of the video, the performance comparisons between AMD and Intel processors are detailed across various applications and power levels. AMD outperforms Intel in Blender at 50 watts but not at 85 watts. V-Ray consistently favors AMD regardless of power levels. Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Premiere also see AMD performing competitively or better than Intel, especially at lower power. DaVinci Resolve shows mixed results with AMD leading at 50 watts and Intel at 85 watts. MATLAB results are split with AMD leading at higher power. Decompression and compression tests favor AMD at lower power, with Intel catching up at higher power. AES encryption/decryption shows AMD’s improvement, though Intel still leads. Microsoft Office, Crossmark (productivity tests), and web browsing with Chrome are slightly better on Intel. Geekbench single-core tests favor Intel too. Overall, AMD is more efficient at lower power, while Intel slightly edges out in overall performance with higher power.
00:09:00
In this part of the video, the presenter discusses the performance comparison between two processors, both limited to 85 watts. They highlight that while the performance difference is generally small in many applications, it can vary significantly depending on the specific application. The focus then shifts to gaming, where both laptops were tested across 26 games at 1080p and 1440p resolutions without upscaling, ensuring fairness by maintaining identical conditions such as game updates, Windows updates, and driver versions.
Key gaming performance highlights include:
– **Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered**: Intel outperformed AMD by 11% in average FPS at 1080p and by 2% at 1440p.
– **Watch Dogs Legion**: AMD outperformed Intel in both average frame rates and 1% lows at both resolutions.
– **Shadow of the Tomb Raider**: Intel showed a significant performance lead, being 12% faster at 1080p and 11% faster at 1440p.
– **A Plague Tale Requiem**: Slight edge for AMD, being 3 FPS faster at 1080p.
– **DOOM Eternal**: Intel performed 12% better at 1080p and 8% better at 1440p.
Overall, the average over 26 games showed Intel’s Core i7-13700H to be just 1% faster than AMD’s Ryzen 7 7840HS at 1080p, essentially indicating negligible difference. The presenter concludes that testing a wide array of games provides a comprehensive view of performance differences, stressing that more data leads to more accurate conclusions.
00:12:00
In this part of the video, the speaker discusses the performance differences between AMD and Intel CPUs at various resolutions and in different scenarios. At 1440p resolution, differences are minimal, with only four out of 26 games showing significant differences beyond the margin of error. On average, there is no substantial difference between the processors in terms of gaming performance. However, AMD’s integrated graphics outperformed Intel’s by 55% in Cyberpunk 2077 at 720p high settings. Intel had a slight advantage in system latency for highly competitive gaming.
The video also highlights that the current pricing shows AMD providing better value for cost per frame and in multicore performance outside gaming. As of this recording, the AMD version of Lenovo’s Legion Slim 5 is cheaper by $80 compared to the Intel version, although prices fluctuate. Ultimately, for gaming, the choice between Intel or AMD should be based on cost rather than performance differences. For non-gaming applications, the choice may depend on the specific workload.
00:15:00
In this segment of the video, the presenter compares Intel and AMD CPUs, highlighting that Intel is preferable for video encoding with Handbrake, while AMD is beneficial for compiling tasks. Additionally, AMD generally offers better battery life and performance when unplugged and is cheaper overall, making it the preferred choice for this generation. However, if battery life and unplugged performance are not concerns, Intel is also a viable option, especially for gaming. The conclusion emphasizes that the choice of the CPU may not be as crucial as the laptop itself, recommending Lenovo’s Legion 5 Slim as an excellent mid-range gaming laptop. The presenter encourages viewers to watch the next detailed review for more information.