Intel Skylake / Kaby Lake

[Abwx]

Irrelevant numbers because you don't like it. We are comparing benchmarks and you are trying to shift your goal post to other things. YOU started with benchmarks, I replied you with benchmarks. This is a 1:1 comparison.

There is not even a power test based on any of these game benchmarks, so how can you say it throttled. Furmark and 3dmark is irrelevant, we already know that AMD does better in 3dmark. Not to mention that Carrizo did use 8 watts more than the linked Broadwell device. Irrelevant for Skylake anyways.

There s a power test made with HVinfo displaying over 18W for the linked 5200U during the stress test...

Anyway i already warned about the difficulty to extract numbers from chips that do not have a fixed power limit, not counting the power deliveries paths i mentioned, good luck finding reviews whose numbers can be trusted confidently.

For Carrizo at 15W i dont use HP numbers but the ones of an Acer wich has about 10% lower scores in CPU tests, this way i m sure to not inflate the numbers as this imply that this laptop chip use about 20% less power than the HP s, this corelate with the HP chip being boosted at 19-20W when cold benched.

Now for SKL i m waiting fo more reviews, so far about all laptops use a dGPU, wich render the analysis boring and likely innaccurate, that s why i wont even bother trying as it s wasted time.

Photo Caption: "The graphics performance increases if a second RAM module is added."

Obviously they added another RAM module.

They often do so with some laptops that are delivered to them without the second RAM stick, to know better require comparing with other reviews.

 

[AtenRa]

Check the link again. The values from the table are using single channel RAM.

Look at the charts below.

IE

World of Warships - 69 fps vs. 47 fps singlechannel (carrizo 50).
Tomb raider - 50 vs 74 fps (carrizo 71).
Dirt Rally - 70 vs 113 fps (carrizo 94)

Your 6200U numbers are for singlechannel RAM.

Your numbers you are for 1024x768,

My numbers are for 1366x768 and they are with Dual Channel memory, link bellow.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-520.149940.0.html

 

[AtenRa]

That means Skylake is faster. You have to agree.

Crysis 3
Carrizo 28 +43,3%
i5-5200U 19.6

Tomb Raider
Carrizo 37 +21,7%
i5-5200U 30.4

Bioshock Infinite
Carrizo 58.9 +36.6%
i5-5200U 43.13

Metro 2033 Last Light
Carrizo 23.1 +2,7%
i5-5200U 22.5

Thief
Carrizo 14.3 -30,6%
i5-5200U 20.6

Grid Autosport
Carrizo 32.2 -13%
i5-5200U 37

Sims 4
Carrizo 34.3 -17,1%
i5-5200U 41.4

Fifa 15
Carrizo 54.7 +49,5%
i5-5200U 36.6

F1 2014
Carrizo 33 -10,8%
i5-5200U 37

Call of Duty Warfare
Carrizo 32.2 -1%
i5-5200U 32.5

81,4/10= +8% Carrizo


http://www.notebookcheck.com/Carrizo-im-Test-Was-leistet-AMDs-A10-8700P.147092.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-V3-371-Notebook-Review.135831.0.html



And Skylake is ~30% faster than Broadwell.

I have already gave you results of the Core i5 6200U and HD520 with dual memory vs Carrizo A10-8700p with R6 iGPU and dual memory. There are some games one wins and other games the other one. But dont forget this is the 384sp R6, R7 with 512sp is faster.

 

[Sweepr]

What s sad is that about all Carrizo laptops use a dGPU, surely an aknowledgement of how great the iGPU must be...

Fixed it for you.

I already pointed that the infos are still scarce, and that s why i used a BDW wich is not a less efficient APU than SKL, eventualy by a few %, or do you think that a miracle is possible even if using the same process.?.

I know, just to show everyone how far you will go to defend the inferior product, by extrapolating Skylake GT3e performance from handpicked Broadwell GT3 tests.

The most powered laptop using a Carrizo is the HP with the chip set at 15W with boost up to 20W for 30-60s if the laptop is cold...

The HP score 2.32-2.36 in CB 11.5 , the Lenovo Ideapad 700 score 3.39 pts, iGPU wise the latter s scores are the following

Which makes the fastest 35W Carrizo retail laptop slower than a thin and light convertible based on 15W Skylake-U, gotcha. And we all know the more popular A10-8700P model scores a mediocre ~2.3 at lower TDPs.

www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-A-Series-...r-Specifications-and-Benchmarks.144218.0.html

Integrated Radeon R7 (Carrizo) @ 35W TDP

Ice Storm Standard Graphics 55596

Cloud Gate Standard Graphics 7431

Sky Diver Standard Graphics 5638

Fire Strike Standard Graphics 1121

Lol, this is even worse than I though. 15W Skylake-U does better here compared to 35W Carrizo than @ 3DMark 11, so mikk's theory that the latter favours AMD is right. That was very useful Abwx, thanks for proving our point, a full sized fat laptop based on 35W Carrizo can't beat the 8.4mm thin Surface Pro 4 with an ultrabook chip. This is embarassing.

Integrated Iris 540 (Skylake-U GT3e) @ 15W TDP

Ice Storm Standard Graphics 83377

Cloud Gate Standard Graphics 11242

Sky Diver Standard Graphics 5476

Fire Strike Standard Graphics 1417

www.3dmark.com/3dm/9339382

So you were talking of a massacre, guess what, it s right, and that s with Lenovo s previous drivers version..

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/ideapad-y700-15acz-review.783192/

Carrizo's iGPU isn't consistently faster than HD 520 at 15W TDP, let alone Iris 540. A far cry from your misleading predictions, especially coupled with the inferior CPU performance.

 

[Abwx]

Lol, this is even worse than I though. 15W Skylake-U does better here compared to 35W Carrizo than @ 3DMark 11, so mikk's theory that the latter favours AMD is right. That was very useful Abwx, thanks for proving our point, a full sized fat laptop based on 35W Carrizo can't beat the 8.4mm thin Surface Pro 4 with an ultrabook chip. This is embarassing.

Integrated Iris 540 (Skylake-U GT3e) @ 15W TDP

Ice Storm Standard Graphics 83377

Cloud Gate Standard Graphics 11242

Sky Diver Standard Graphics 5476

Fire Strike Standard Graphics 1417

www.3dmark.com/3dm/9339382


Carrizo can't even consistently beat HD 520 at 15W TDP, let alone Iris 540. A far cry from your misleading predictions, especially coupled with the inferior CPU performance.

Lol, you cant post a single measurement of power for SKL, as i already pointed you re stuck with marketing numbers extracted from Intel s fraudulous TDP ratings.

Prove is that Anandtech didnt publish power measurements, how is it that they didnt do a comparison with the surface pro 3 to show us how efficient this marvel is..?.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9727/the-microsoft-surface-pro-4-review-raising-the-bar

Get at NBC and see the Surface pro review, no power measurements as well, although the temperatures tell us that it consume much more than the Surface 3...

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Erster-Eindruck-Microsoft-Surface-Pro-4-Core-i5-im-Test.153170.0.html

Let s laugh a little about this doctored review to make SKL look better while it s a disaster :

Ambient temp is 27°C (!) for the Surface 3 and 20.4°C for the Surface 4,
MAX temps of the cases are respectively 46.4°C and 52.3°C.

The temperature delta is 24°C for the Surface 3 and 31.9°C for the Surface 4, just with this number we know that the Surface 4 consume 32.9% more than the Surface 3...

Of course thanks to the artificialy lowered ambiant the S4 can sustain higher powers for significantly longer periods, wich help the scores to be boosted the same way, that is artificialy, do you live in a house wich is at 20°C.??.lolz

Anyway keep on feeding us with Intel s fairy tales, i guess that it cost less to pay marketers than to design a genuinely innovative chip like AMD did..

 

[videogames101]

Lol, you cant post a single measurement of power for SKL, as i already pointed you re stuck with marketing numbers extracted from Intel s fraudulous TDP ratings.

Prove is that Anandtech didnt publish power measurements, how is it that they didnt do a comparison with the surface pro 3 to show us how efficient this marvel is..?.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9727/the-microsoft-surface-pro-4-review-raising-the-bar

Get at NBC and see the Surface pro review, no power measurements as well, although the temperatures tell us that it consume much more than the Surface 3...

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Erster-Eindruck-Microsoft-Surface-Pro-4-Core-i5-im-Test.153170.0.html

Let s laugh a little about this doctored review to make SKL look better while it s a disaster :

Ambient temp is 27°C (!) for the Surface 3 and 20.4°C for the Surface 4,
MAX temps of the cases are respectively 46.4°C and 52.3°C.

The temperature delta is 24°C for the Surface 3 and 31.9°C for the Surface 4, just with this number we know that the Surface 4 consume 32.9% more than the Surface 3...

Of course thanks to the artificialy lowered ambiant the S4 can sustain higher powers for significantly longer periods, wich help the scores to be boosted the same way, that is artificialy, do you live in a house wich is at 20°C.??.lolz

Anyway keep on feeding us with Intel s fairy tales, i guess that it cost less to pay marketers than to design a genuinely innovative chip like AMD did..

I don't care if you don't want to buy Intel products, in fact I'm financially vested against Intel doing well. But to call out Intel's chip design teams for not doing any innovative? You really need to stop spouting that shit. What world do you live in? Do you really think no one at Intel is doing the real engineering legwork to produce innovative products? That they only pay their marketing team? Just stop, please - the same engineers have worked at both companies, and both companies put as large a sum of cash as they can into R&D and engineering. Both companies have products that perform well with certain workloads. Neither AMD nor Intel has any magic sauce, every product takes many many man-years to get right. Stick to the facts rather than this shit-throwing you always tend to do.

 

[Burpo]

Aww.. you missed him too (Abwx) Give him credit for being consistent (and entertaining). No matter how informed (or not) he is about intel, you can count on him to spew his own "fairy tales"..

 

[dahorns]

Lol, you cant post a single measurement of power for SKL, as i already pointed you re stuck with marketing numbers extracted from Intel s fraudulous TDP ratings.

Prove is that Anandtech didnt publish power measurements, how is it that they didnt do a comparison with the surface pro 3 to show us how efficient this marvel is..?.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9727/the-microsoft-surface-pro-4-review-raising-the-bar

Get at NBC and see the Surface pro review, no power measurements as well, although the temperatures tell us that it consume much more than the Surface 3...

Uh, you didnt look very hard. Nbc has measurements on their test pages for the i5 and m3. You got to click the links at the bottom. The i5 tops out at 19.9.

You could also figure power consumption couldnt be worse than the sp3 since the sp4 gets the same or better battery life with a larger, denser screen and a smaller battery. And it gets much better battery at full load despite also staying clocked higher due to avoiding thermal throttling.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I don't care if you don't want to buy Intel products, in fact I'm financially vested against Intel doing well. But to call out Intel's chip design teams for not doing any innovative? You really need to stop spouting that shit. What world do you live in? Do you really think no one at Intel is doing the real engineering legwork to produce innovative products? That they only pay their marketing team? Just stop, please - the same engineers have worked at both companies, and both companies put as large a sum of cash as they can into R&D and engineering. Both companies have products that perform well with certain workloads. Neither AMD nor Intel has any magic sauce, every product takes many many man-years to get right. Stick to the facts rather than this shit-throwing you always tend to do.

:thumbsup:

 

[Abwx]

I don't care if you don't want to buy Intel products, in fact I'm financially vested against Intel doing well. But to call out Intel's chip design teams for not doing any innovative? You really need to stop spouting that shit. What world do you live in? Do you really think no one at Intel is doing the real engineering legwork to produce innovative products? That they only pay their marketing team? Just stop, please - the same engineers have worked at both companies, and both companies put as large a sum of cash as they can into R&D and engineering. Both companies have products that perform well with certain workloads. Neither AMD nor Intel has any magic sauce, every product takes many many man-years to get right. Stick to the facts rather than this shit-throwing you always tend to do.

The only fact i see here are the numbers i m posting, or are you implying that 32.9% more temperature delta mean less comsumption.?..

As i said in a previous post perf/Watt numbers of current products are not that exceptional, the difference is that Intel has a huge marketing budget to make things look better than they actualy are.

Besides it s quite surprising that there s no serious power measurement made to check the efficencies, generaly when a firm has something great they publish numbers and make sure that reviewer confirm them, if the firm do the contrary then it means that they have something to hide, and in this case it s easily demonstrated.

Uh, you didnt look very hard. Nbc has measurements on their test pages for the i5 and m3. You got to click the links at the bottom. The i5 tops out at 19.9.

You could also figure power consumption couldnt be worse than the sp3 since the sp4 gets the same or better battery life with a larger, denser screen and a smaller battery. And it gets much better battery at full load despite also staying clocked higher due to avoiding thermal throttling.

Yes, let see this review :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Microsoft-Surface-Pro-4-Core-i5-128-GB-Tablet.153922.0.html

So they are saying 19.9W at most measured on the wall...

Let see what the stress tests on the same review are saying :

Total sytem power at 30.263W....

And that s with a 12"3 screen and a SSD.

There s two possible explanations, the first is that NBC rigged the review and the second is what i mentioned about power deliveries paths, that is, to use a lower power DC/DC converter in the laptop and to use the battery as complement.

And a last thing, the "Prime 95 alone test" :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_SP4_i5Furmark_solo_7192009965.png

Lol, there s no prime 95 running, they just used the two other pic i posted if we are to look at the numbers, actualy i think that the review is extremely doctored.

:thumbsup:

 

[Abwx]

Aww.. you missed him too (Abwx) Give him credit for being consistent (and entertaining). No matter how informed (or not) he is about intel, you can count on him to spew his own "fairy tales"..

Yes, i posted some fairy tales above, courtesy of Intel, Microsoft and of course NBC....

 

[MrTeal]

And a last thing, the "Prime 95 alone test" :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_SP4_i5Furmark_solo_7192009965.png

Lol, there s no prime 95 running, they just used the two other pic i posted if we are to look at the numbers, actualy i think that the review is extremely doctored.

How do you know Prime 95 isn't running?

 

[coercitiv]

So they are saying 19.9W at most measured on the wall...

[snip]

Total sytem power at 30.263W....

And that s with a 12"3 screen and a SSD.

That's peak system power draw,and it shouldn't surprise anyone that a mobile device with a CPU capable of 25W turbo boost reaches 30W peak power consumption. Average power consumption under full load will however be 20W, as shown even by the battery runtime at full load (aprox. 2 hours with a 42Whr battery).

Keep in mind that for the duration of a constant full load test, the device will consume 30W for only 30 seconds, then it will default to 20W for the rest of the test... around 7000 seconds.

NBC did mess up the power measurement data though, bet they used average power for both med and max data. There's no reason to use battery power over 20W, the charger is rated at 36W.

 

[Abwx]

How do you know Prime 95 isn't running?

Because there s no P95 logo on the task bar.

Here the pic :

Another review s P95 test :

NBC reviews are paid review for most of them, a few firms have some requirements that are respected like Dell refusing to have power consumption displayed, Apple got their imac PSU completely cancelled from the review because power drain was 45W with a 45W PSU delivered.

There s also shills at NBC, apparently the one who rigged a Toshiba Carrizo-L laptop review was kicked out of NBC due to his blatant shilling that got them being refused the next deliveries by Toshiba.

 

[Abwx]

NBC did mess up the power measurement data though, bet they used average power for both med and max data. There's no reason to use battery power over 20W, the charger is rated at 36W.

A 36W PSU is not enough for a device that get to 30W because it must be able to supply the PC while eventualy charging the battery at the same time.

As for how much time it can boost this depend of the ambiant temp, in this case they have an artificialy lowered ambiant at 20.4°C, but that s not the worse, Asus got their device using an m3-6Y30 chip tested at a 18°C ambiant :

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Asus-Zenbook-UX305CA-M-6Y30-Subnotebook.154496.0.html

That's peak system power draw,and it shouldn't surprise anyone that a mobile device with a CPU capable of 25W turbo boost reaches 30W peak power consumption. Average power consumption under full load will however be 20W, as shown even by the battery runtime at full load (aprox. 2 hours with a 42Whr battery).

You are completely wrong, on battery the max power is not as high as when main plugged and perfs are lower as a consequence.

Besides that s not peak power, the chip is throttled at 15W and the difference is the power used to charge the battery that was somewhat discharged during the boosted phase of the test, in this exemple something like 8W are used to recharge the battery.

 

[MrTeal]

Because there s no P95 logo on the task bar.

If you're running Prime95 and you close the window, it minimizes to the system tray without a taskbar logo while still running.

 

[Abwx]

If you're running Prime95 and you close the window, it minimizes to the system tray without a taskbar logo while still running.

lol, what an imagination...

If you close the window you ll also close the worker and P95 as well, i just tested it, not that i did believe your assumption but i wanted to check that you didnt even try to check by yourself...

 

[ShintaiDK]

lol, what an imagination...

If you close the window you ll also close the worker and P95 as well, i just tested it, not that i did believe your assumption but i wanted to check that you didnt even try to check by yourself...

As always you have no clue what you talk about.

 

[dahorns]

lol, what an imagination...

If you close the window you ll also close the worker and P95 as well, i just tested it, not that i did believe your assumption but i wanted to check that you didnt even try to check by yourself...

Honestly, I can't even figure out the point to your line of attack. Let's say prime 95 isn't running, so what? Clearly something is running that has the processor pegged and the igpu idle. And whether that something is prime 95 or the unicorn fart simulator, isn't pegging the cpu the point of the test? What is the point of your ridiculous conspiracy?

 

[Abwx]

As always you have no clue what you talk about.

It s you who have no clue, if the worker is closed the computation is stopped even if you have P95 opened, when the computation occur you ll automaticaly have the logo on the task bar since the worker is open in this case.

Do some tests rather than running after excuses, i posted two pics and the second one is what must be displayed when the worker is activated.

 

[Phynaz]

If you're running Prime95 and you close the window, it minimizes to the system tray without a taskbar logo while still running.

Ha, Abwx getting powned.

Couldn't happen to a nicer shill.

 

[Abwx]

Honestly, I can't even figure out the point to your line of attack. Let's say prime 95 isn't running, so what? Clearly something is running that has the processor pegged and the igpu idle. And whether that something is prime 95 or the unicorn fart simulator, isn't pegging the cpu the point of the test? What is the point of your ridiculous conspiracy?

Conspiracy..??.lol, i guess that you have no argument, hence this ridiculous straw of yours.

If you did look at the other stress tests you ll see that the max power is exactly the same with 3 decimals, that s 30.263W..

Isnt it extraordinary that the system consume exactly the same max power with such a precison in two different tests..?..

A hint, they just recycled the other windows.

Ha, Abwx getting powned.

Couldn't happen to a nicer shill.

Lol, that s the panic apparently within Intel s support brigade, ad hominems are just aknowledgment of desperation...

Tell Computerbase.de that they are shill as well since they exposed how crappy are the i3/i5s.

I put it again so eveybody can witness Intel wonderfull ST perf collapsing by 60% once 5 paltry threads are loading the CPU :

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-10/...gramm-multitasking-test-cinebench-plus-winrar

And even 57% losses for the i7 6700K with 9 threads, actualy i was wrong, not only the i3/i5s are a disaster but the SKL i7 is also a very poor multitasker...

 

[ShintaiDK]

It s you who have no clue, if the worker is closed the computation is stopped even if you have P95 opened, when the computation occur you ll automaticaly have the logo on the task bar since the worker is open in this case.

Do some tests rather than running after excuses, i posted two pics and the second one is what must be displayed when the worker is activated.

The worker is still active, hence heavy CPU load.

Ha, Abwx getting powned.

Couldn't happen to a nicer shill.

Very.

 

[crashtech]

The chevron to the left of the notification area in the disputed screencap indicates that some notifications are hidden.

 

[MrTeal]

lol, what an imagination...

If you close the window you ll also close the worker and P95 as well, i just tested it, not that i did believe your assumption but i wanted to check that you didnt even try to check by yourself...

No, it definitely does.

If you have Windows auto-hide system tray icons, it can be disturbingly easy to accidentally leave P95 stress test running on your computer for a weekend.