8 ms·

AMD's Radeon 890M: Strix Point's Bigger iGPU

158 points by luyu_wu 2y ago

torrance 2y ago
These results are promising and hopefully carry over to the upcoming Strix Halo which I’m eagerly awaiting. With a rumoured 40 compute cores and performance on par with a low power (<95W) mobile RTX4070, it would make an exciting small form gaming box.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  I've been super excited for Strix Halo, but I'm also nervous. Strix Halo is a multi-chip design, and I'm pretty nervous about whether AMD can pull it off in a mobile form factor, while still being a good mobile chip. Strix Point can be brought down to 15W and still do awesome. And go up to 55W+ and be fine. Nice idles. But it's monolithic, and I'm not sure if AMD & TSMC are really making that power penalty of multichip go down enough.
  - luyu_wu 2y ago
    Very valid concerns! AMD's current die-to-die interconnects have some pretty abysmal energy/bit. Really hope they can pull off something similar to Intel's EMIB maybe?
    - wtallis 2y ago
      The rumors saying Strix Halo will be a multi-chip product are saying it's re-using the existing Zen5 CPU chiplets from the desktop and server parts and just replacing the IO die with one that has a vastly larger iGPU and double the DRAM controllers. So they might be able to save a bit of power with more advanced packaging that puts the chiplets right next to each other, but it'll still be the same IF links that are power-hungry on the desktop parts.
  - _cenw 2y ago
    The 7945HX3D needs 55W minimum, if that's any indicator.
- KingOfCoders 2y ago
  I hope Strix Halo gets a desktop motherboard (no socket :-( for the memory bandwidth for faster compiles (Go). That or a 9950X3D (like the 7950X3D).
  - naoru 2y ago
    Me too. There's at least one manufacturer who makes pretty sweet mini-ITX motherboard with R9 7945HX, I hope they will follow up with Strix Halo once it's released.
- layer8 2y ago
  That kind of performance will still require significant cooling, which if you want it to be quiet is helped by a larger box.
rishav_sharan 2y ago
I love how well Intel's Arc iGPU and AMDs Strix Point iGPU are doing. I am planning to get an iGPU laptop with 64 Gb RAM. I plan on using local llms and image generators and hopefully with that large of shared RAM that shouldn't be too much of a problem. But I am worried that all LLM tools today are pretty much NVidia specific, and I wouldn't be able to get my local setup going.
- dagmx 2y ago
  Can they access the full RAM? Afaik they get capped to a portion of total available RAM. But to your other point, very little of the current popular ML stack does more than CUDA and MPS. Some will do rocm but I don’t know if the AMD iGPUs are guaranteed to support it? There’s not much for Intel GPUs.
  - hedgehog 2y ago
    It depends on the API used, whether the data is in the region considered "GPU memory" or whether it's shared with the compute API from the app's memory space. Support is somewhat in flux and I haven't been following closely but if you're curious this is my bookmarked jumping of point (a PyTorch ticket about this): https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/107605 https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/107605
    - slavik81 2y ago
      My understanding is that as of Linux 6.10, the driver will now dynamically allocate more memory for the iGPU [1]. The driver team apparently reused a strategy that had been developed for MI300A. I'm hoping that in combination with the gfx11-generic ISA introduced in LLVM 18, this will make it straightforward to enable compute applications on both Phoenix and Strix (even if they are not officially supported by ROCm). [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?h=v6.10-rc4&id=eb853413d02c8d9b27942429b261a9eef228f005 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
      - 2y ago
Shorel 2y ago
Similar performance to Nvidia 1080 dedicated GPU. Would I get it? Absolutely yes. A full desktop small form factor is a very convenient, nice thing.
- dagmx 2y ago
  Where do you see a performance comparison for the 1080? The only mention of NVIDIA in the post is of the 1050 which is a considerable step away from a 1080. > It also moves ahead of Nvidia’s Pascal based GTX 1050 3 GB
  - lhl 2y ago
    From Notebookcheck's benchmarks it looks like the Radeon 890M is punching at about a GeForce 1650 Mobile's performance: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphics-Cards.13849.0.html?type=&sort=&gpubenchmarks=1&professional=2&multiplegpus=1&archive=1&perfrating=1&or=0&itemselect_10227=10227&itemselect_9828=9828&itemselect_12524=12524&gameselect%5B%5D=1008&gameselect%5B%5D=1004&gameselect%5B%5D=998&gameselect%5B%5D=990&gameselect%5B%5D=974&gameselect%5B%5D=941&gameselect%5B%5D=919&gameselect%5B%5D=899&gameselect%5B%5D=554&gameselect%5B%5D=532&gameselect%5B%5D=332&gameselect%5B%5D=329&gpu_fullname=1 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graph... Based on https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-1650-mobile.c3367 https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-1650-mobil... this is about 40% faster than a GTX 1050, but also almost half the speed of a GTX 1080.
    - dagmx 2y ago
      Thanks. That’s more like what I’d expect given the rest of the article details. I was worried I’d missed some kind of massive uplift.
  - Shorel 2y ago
    Sorry, I forgot to add it was the mobile version of the 1080, which is indeed slower than full form factor.
Luker88 2y ago
I basically only buy AMD, but I want to point out how rocm still doesn't fully support the 780M. I have a laptop with a 680M and a mini pc with a 780M both beefy enough to play around with small LLM. You basically have to force the gpu detection to an older version, and I get tons of gpu resets on both. AMD your hardware is good please give the software more love.
- dannyw 2y ago
  AMD doesn't realise the wide penetration and availability of CUDA is what makes the ecosystem so strong. Developers can develop and test on their personal devices which are prevalent, and that's what creates such a big software ecosystem for the expensive chips. When I raised this feedback with our AMD Rep, they said it was intentional and that consumer GPUs are primarily meant for gaming. Absolutely shortsighted.
  - carlmr 2y ago
    It's either strategic incompetence, technical incompetence, or both at this point.
    - ahartmetz 2y ago
      At least they seem to be seriously trying to fix it now. https://www.techpowerup.com/324171/amd-is-becoming-a-software-company-heres-the-plan https://www.techpowerup.com/324171/amd-is-becoming-a-softwar...
      - throwaway48476 2y ago
        They just revoked permission to open source the CUDA on AMD driver. I don't think they've gotten the message yet.
        anticensor 2y ago
        There is still an active fork: https://github.com/lshqqytiger/ZLUDA https://github.com/lshqqytiger/ZLUDA
bornfreddy 2y ago
Interesting: > With Strix Point, AMD’s mobile iGPU has a newer graphics architecture than its desktop counterparts. It’s an unprecedented situation, but not a surprising one. Since the DX11 era, AMD has never been able to take and hold the top spot in the discrete GPU market. Nvidia has been building giant chips where cost is no object for a long time, and they’re good at it. Perhaps AMD sees lower power gaming as a market segment where they can really excel. Strix Point seems to be a reflection of that. Did AMD figure out that this market segment is underserved by NVidia? If so, good for them, laptops could use better GPUs.
- dagmx 2y ago
  I doubt Strix Point is gunning for NVIDIA. It’s more than likely this is just a stronger play to get ahead of Intel in market share. That’s a much more tangible competitor in that space. Whether it means more games optimize for AMD as a side effect is tangential at best. Otherwise there’s no real reason to treat this as competing with NVIDIA. It’s an integrated GPU so it’s not moving any extra units.
- mmaniac 2y ago
  Nvidia can't really enter this segment unless Windows on ARM takes off, and they don't want to be the one to put the first foot forward. If Snapdragon X Elite is a success, you can bet Nvidia will be producing laptop SoCs with passable CPUs and great iGPUs.
setgree 2y ago
So what was AMD thinking with its release of the 8700G and 8600G APUs, and is it planning to phase them out? They come with the 780M and 680M processors, respectively, and both are outperformed by the 980M at a lower power draw [0]. Theoretically a consumer can't put these parts directly in a pc there's already a mini-pc with the laptop part 980M [1]. The 7800G sometimes shows up in mid-range and high-end gaming PCs with discrete graphics cards [2], which makes so little sense that I wonder if AMD quietly offloaded them in bulk at a steep discount to vendors. I've commented on this before [3], can anyone shed light on the situation? [0] https://www.anandtech.com/show/21485/the-amd-ryzen-ai-hx-370-review/9 https://www.anandtech.com/show/21485/the-amd-ryzen-ai-hx-370... [1] https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/soyos-upcoming-ryzen-ai-hx-9-370-powered-mini-pc-reviewed-ahead-of-release https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/soyos-upcomin... [2] https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/hp-omen-35l-hands-on-testing-a-quiet-mid-tower https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/hp-omen-35l... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41140287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41140287
- luyu_wu 2y ago
  APUs have their own small niche in the DIY market! From what I understand, some people build their own computer without a dGPU first, then later purchase a GPU and prefer to be able to change the CPU at that point as well? Hopefully this rationale is what you're asking for!
  - setgree 2y ago
    In theory this makes sense, but reviews all suggested that the price proposition for the APUs didn't really work and now AMD has released a laptop part that fills the same niche. DIY folks won't be able to get their hands on the laptop part right away but presumably soon? It just seems kind of odd to release something that outperforms your own product in the same segment.
    - burmanm 2y ago
      The 8600G/8700G are installed to normal AM5 socket and can be swapped. The laptop parts are socketed and are not going to be available in the AM5 market.
aurareturn 2y ago
Some comparisons: 4k Aztec High GFX * AMD 890M: 39.1fps * M3: 51.8fps 3DMark Wild Life Extreme * AMD 890M: 7623 * M3: 8286 Power: * AMD 890M: 46w * M3: 8286: 17w M3 about ~253% more efficient. But of course, if your goal is gaming, AMD's GPU will still be better because of Vulkan, DirectX, and Windows support. In pure architecture, AMD is quite a bit behind Apple.
- adrian_b 2y ago
  The "170%" number is bogus. Reducing the power of 890M to 17 W, the same as quoted for M3, would reduce the performance much less than the reduction in power consumption, improving the energy efficiency. For a valid comparison of the energy efficiency, both systems must be configured for the same power consumption. Moreover, by themselves those performance values do not prove that AMD is behind Apple in GPU architecture. The better performance of the Apple GPU could be entirely caused by the much higher memory bandwidth and by the better CMOS process used for the Apple GPU. For any conclusions about architecture, much more detailed tests would be needed, to separate the effects of the other differences that exist between these systems.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    >The "170%" number is bogus. Actually, it's 253%. I made a mistake assuming the 890M was limited to 35w. It was actually 46w as measured by Notebookcheck.[0] >Reducing the power of 890M to 17 W, the same as quoted for M3, would reduce the performance much less than the reduction in power consumption, improving the energy efficiency. That depends. Sure, give almost any chip less power and it will be more efficient. I'm not arguing against that. The problem with reducing power for the 890M is that it's already slower than the M3 by 26% while using 2.7x the power. If you give the 890M 17w, yes, it will be more efficient than 46w. It just just be even slower than the M3. >The better performance of the Apple GPU could be entirely caused by the much higher memory bandwidth M3's bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s. AMD Strix Point uses LPDDR5X-7500 in dual channel mode so it should be around 120GB/s. >and by the better CMOS process used for the Apple GPU. AMD's Strix Point is manufactured on TSMC's N4P. M3 is on N3B, which is roughly 10% more power efficient than N4P. It doesn't explain the huge discrepancy in efficiency. [0]https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Zen-5-Strix-Point-iGPU-analysis-Radeon-890M-versus-Intel-Arc-Graphics-Apple-M3-and-Qualcomm-Adreno-X1-85.868475.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Zen-5-Strix-Point-iGPU-ana...
mastax 2y ago
How fortunate for Intel that as soon as they ruin their CPU naming scheme, AMD follow suit.
- mmaniac 2y ago
  AMD's mobile CPUs have had confusing names since 2022 with the 7000 series, and are now completely bonkers. The completely unnecessary insertion of "AI" into every name, the TDP suffix now an optional prefix, and the extremely poorly justified generation counter starting at 300. Intel on the other hand were fairly sensible. i7 becomes Ultra 7 and the numbering restarts from 100 (Meteor Lake). That's easy to follow.

158 points by luyu_wu 2y ago

These results are promising and hopefully carry over to the upcoming Strix Halo which I’m eagerly awaiting. With a rumoured 40 compute cores and performance on par with a low power (<95W) mobile RTX4070, it would make an exciting small form gaming box.

jauntywundrkind 2y ago
I've been super excited for Strix Halo, but I'm also nervous. Strix Halo is a multi-chip design, and I'm pretty nervous about whether AMD can pull it off in a mobile form factor, while still being a good mobile chip. Strix Point can be brought down to 15W and still do awesome. And go up to 55W+ and be fine. Nice idles. But it's monolithic, and I'm not sure if AMD & TSMC are really making that power penalty of multichip go down enough.
- luyu_wu 2y ago
  Very valid concerns! AMD's current die-to-die interconnects have some pretty abysmal energy/bit. Really hope they can pull off something similar to Intel's EMIB maybe?
  - wtallis 2y ago
    The rumors saying Strix Halo will be a multi-chip product are saying it's re-using the existing Zen5 CPU chiplets from the desktop and server parts and just replacing the IO die with one that has a vastly larger iGPU and double the DRAM controllers. So they might be able to save a bit of power with more advanced packaging that puts the chiplets right next to each other, but it'll still be the same IF links that are power-hungry on the desktop parts.
- _cenw 2y ago
  The 7945HX3D needs 55W minimum, if that's any indicator.
KingOfCoders 2y ago
I hope Strix Halo gets a desktop motherboard (no socket :-( for the memory bandwidth for faster compiles (Go). That or a 9950X3D (like the 7950X3D).
- naoru 2y ago
  Me too. There's at least one manufacturer who makes pretty sweet mini-ITX motherboard with R9 7945HX, I hope they will follow up with Strix Halo once it's released.
layer8 2y ago
That kind of performance will still require significant cooling, which if you want it to be quiet is helped by a larger box.

rishav_sharan 2y ago

I love how well Intel's Arc iGPU and AMDs Strix Point iGPU are doing. I am planning to get an iGPU laptop with 64 Gb RAM. I plan on using local llms and image generators and hopefully with that large of shared RAM that shouldn't be too much of a problem. But I am worried that all LLM tools today are pretty much NVidia specific, and I wouldn't be able to get my local setup going.

dagmx 2y ago
Can they access the full RAM? Afaik they get capped to a portion of total available RAM. But to your other point, very little of the current popular ML stack does more than CUDA and MPS. Some will do rocm but I don’t know if the AMD iGPUs are guaranteed to support it? There’s not much for Intel GPUs.
- hedgehog 2y ago
  It depends on the API used, whether the data is in the region considered "GPU memory" or whether it's shared with the compute API from the app's memory space. Support is somewhat in flux and I haven't been following closely but if you're curious this is my bookmarked jumping of point (a PyTorch ticket about this): https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/107605 https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/107605
  - slavik81 2y ago
    My understanding is that as of Linux 6.10, the driver will now dynamically allocate more memory for the iGPU [1]. The driver team apparently reused a strategy that had been developed for MI300A. I'm hoping that in combination with the gfx11-generic ISA introduced in LLVM 18, this will make it straightforward to enable compute applications on both Phoenix and Strix (even if they are not officially supported by ROCm). [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?h=v6.10-rc4&id=eb853413d02c8d9b27942429b261a9eef228f005 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
    - 2y ago

Shorel 2y ago

Similar performance to Nvidia 1080 dedicated GPU. Would I get it? Absolutely yes. A full desktop small form factor is a very convenient, nice thing.

dagmx 2y ago
Where do you see a performance comparison for the 1080? The only mention of NVIDIA in the post is of the 1050 which is a considerable step away from a 1080. > It also moves ahead of Nvidia’s Pascal based GTX 1050 3 GB
- lhl 2y ago
  From Notebookcheck's benchmarks it looks like the Radeon 890M is punching at about a GeForce 1650 Mobile's performance: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graphics-Cards.13849.0.html?type=&sort=&gpubenchmarks=1&professional=2&multiplegpus=1&archive=1&perfrating=1&or=0&itemselect_10227=10227&itemselect_9828=9828&itemselect_12524=12524&gameselect%5B%5D=1008&gameselect%5B%5D=1004&gameselect%5B%5D=998&gameselect%5B%5D=990&gameselect%5B%5D=974&gameselect%5B%5D=941&gameselect%5B%5D=919&gameselect%5B%5D=899&gameselect%5B%5D=554&gameselect%5B%5D=532&gameselect%5B%5D=332&gameselect%5B%5D=329&gpu_fullname=1 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-Games-on-Laptop-Graph... Based on https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-1650-mobile.c3367 https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gtx-1650-mobil... this is about 40% faster than a GTX 1050, but also almost half the speed of a GTX 1080.
  - dagmx 2y ago
    Thanks. That’s more like what I’d expect given the rest of the article details. I was worried I’d missed some kind of massive uplift.
- Shorel 2y ago
  Sorry, I forgot to add it was the mobile version of the 1080, which is indeed slower than full form factor.

Luker88 2y ago

I basically only buy AMD, but I want to point out how rocm still doesn't fully support the 780M. I have a laptop with a 680M and a mini pc with a 780M both beefy enough to play around with small LLM. You basically have to force the gpu detection to an older version, and I get tons of gpu resets on both. AMD your hardware is good please give the software more love.

dannyw 2y ago
AMD doesn't realise the wide penetration and availability of CUDA is what makes the ecosystem so strong. Developers can develop and test on their personal devices which are prevalent, and that's what creates such a big software ecosystem for the expensive chips. When I raised this feedback with our AMD Rep, they said it was intentional and that consumer GPUs are primarily meant for gaming. Absolutely shortsighted.
- carlmr 2y ago
  It's either strategic incompetence, technical incompetence, or both at this point.
  - ahartmetz 2y ago
    At least they seem to be seriously trying to fix it now. https://www.techpowerup.com/324171/amd-is-becoming-a-software-company-heres-the-plan https://www.techpowerup.com/324171/amd-is-becoming-a-softwar...
    - throwaway48476 2y ago
      They just revoked permission to open source the CUDA on AMD driver. I don't think they've gotten the message yet.
      - anticensor 2y ago
        There is still an active fork: https://github.com/lshqqytiger/ZLUDA https://github.com/lshqqytiger/ZLUDA

bornfreddy 2y ago

Interesting: > With Strix Point, AMD’s mobile iGPU has a newer graphics architecture than its desktop counterparts. It’s an unprecedented situation, but not a surprising one. Since the DX11 era, AMD has never been able to take and hold the top spot in the discrete GPU market. Nvidia has been building giant chips where cost is no object for a long time, and they’re good at it. Perhaps AMD sees lower power gaming as a market segment where they can really excel. Strix Point seems to be a reflection of that. Did AMD figure out that this market segment is underserved by NVidia? If so, good for them, laptops could use better GPUs.

dagmx 2y ago
I doubt Strix Point is gunning for NVIDIA. It’s more than likely this is just a stronger play to get ahead of Intel in market share. That’s a much more tangible competitor in that space. Whether it means more games optimize for AMD as a side effect is tangential at best. Otherwise there’s no real reason to treat this as competing with NVIDIA. It’s an integrated GPU so it’s not moving any extra units.
mmaniac 2y ago
Nvidia can't really enter this segment unless Windows on ARM takes off, and they don't want to be the one to put the first foot forward. If Snapdragon X Elite is a success, you can bet Nvidia will be producing laptop SoCs with passable CPUs and great iGPUs.

setgree 2y ago

So what was AMD thinking with its release of the 8700G and 8600G APUs, and is it planning to phase them out? They come with the 780M and 680M processors, respectively, and both are outperformed by the 980M at a lower power draw [0]. Theoretically a consumer can't put these parts directly in a pc there's already a mini-pc with the laptop part 980M [1]. The 7800G sometimes shows up in mid-range and high-end gaming PCs with discrete graphics cards [2], which makes so little sense that I wonder if AMD quietly offloaded them in bulk at a steep discount to vendors. I've commented on this before [3], can anyone shed light on the situation? [0] https://www.anandtech.com/show/21485/the-amd-ryzen-ai-hx-370-review/9 https://www.anandtech.com/show/21485/the-amd-ryzen-ai-hx-370... [1] https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/soyos-upcoming-ryzen-ai-hx-9-370-powered-mini-pc-reviewed-ahead-of-release https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/soyos-upcomin... [2] https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/hp-omen-35l-hands-on-testing-a-quiet-mid-tower https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/hp-omen-35l... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41140287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41140287

luyu_wu 2y ago
APUs have their own small niche in the DIY market! From what I understand, some people build their own computer without a dGPU first, then later purchase a GPU and prefer to be able to change the CPU at that point as well? Hopefully this rationale is what you're asking for!
- setgree 2y ago
  In theory this makes sense, but reviews all suggested that the price proposition for the APUs didn't really work and now AMD has released a laptop part that fills the same niche. DIY folks won't be able to get their hands on the laptop part right away but presumably soon? It just seems kind of odd to release something that outperforms your own product in the same segment.
  - burmanm 2y ago
    The 8600G/8700G are installed to normal AM5 socket and can be swapped. The laptop parts are socketed and are not going to be available in the AM5 market.

aurareturn 2y ago

Some comparisons: 4k Aztec High GFX * AMD 890M: 39.1fps * M3: 51.8fps 3DMark Wild Life Extreme * AMD 890M: 7623 * M3: 8286 Power: * AMD 890M: 46w * M3: 8286: 17w M3 about ~253% more efficient. But of course, if your goal is gaming, AMD's GPU will still be better because of Vulkan, DirectX, and Windows support. In pure architecture, AMD is quite a bit behind Apple.

adrian_b 2y ago
The "170%" number is bogus. Reducing the power of 890M to 17 W, the same as quoted for M3, would reduce the performance much less than the reduction in power consumption, improving the energy efficiency. For a valid comparison of the energy efficiency, both systems must be configured for the same power consumption. Moreover, by themselves those performance values do not prove that AMD is behind Apple in GPU architecture. The better performance of the Apple GPU could be entirely caused by the much higher memory bandwidth and by the better CMOS process used for the Apple GPU. For any conclusions about architecture, much more detailed tests would be needed, to separate the effects of the other differences that exist between these systems.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  >The "170%" number is bogus. Actually, it's 253%. I made a mistake assuming the 890M was limited to 35w. It was actually 46w as measured by Notebookcheck.[0] >Reducing the power of 890M to 17 W, the same as quoted for M3, would reduce the performance much less than the reduction in power consumption, improving the energy efficiency. That depends. Sure, give almost any chip less power and it will be more efficient. I'm not arguing against that. The problem with reducing power for the 890M is that it's already slower than the M3 by 26% while using 2.7x the power. If you give the 890M 17w, yes, it will be more efficient than 46w. It just just be even slower than the M3. >The better performance of the Apple GPU could be entirely caused by the much higher memory bandwidth M3's bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s. AMD Strix Point uses LPDDR5X-7500 in dual channel mode so it should be around 120GB/s. >and by the better CMOS process used for the Apple GPU. AMD's Strix Point is manufactured on TSMC's N4P. M3 is on N3B, which is roughly 10% more power efficient than N4P. It doesn't explain the huge discrepancy in efficiency. [0]https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Zen-5-Strix-Point-iGPU-analysis-Radeon-890M-versus-Intel-Arc-Graphics-Apple-M3-and-Qualcomm-Adreno-X1-85.868475.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Zen-5-Strix-Point-iGPU-ana...

mastax 2y ago

How fortunate for Intel that as soon as they ruin their CPU naming scheme, AMD follow suit.

mmaniac 2y ago
AMD's mobile CPUs have had confusing names since 2022 with the 7000 series, and are now completely bonkers. The completely unnecessary insertion of "AI" into every name, the TDP suffix now an optional prefix, and the extremely poorly justified generation counter starting at 300. Intel on the other hand were fairly sensible. i7 becomes Ultra 7 and the numbering restarts from 100 (Meteor Lake). That's easy to follow.