AMD Ryzen 9 5980HS Cezanne Defeats Intel Tiger Lake in Early Benchmarks
But watch out for the Apple M1.
The first alleged independent benchmark results of AMD's recently introduced eight-core Ryzen 9 5980HS "Cezanne" laptop processors have been published. AMD's Zen 3-based chip uses integrated Radeon graphics, and, according to the new numbers, beats its predecessor and Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake in single- and multi-core workloads, as well as 11th Gen intel Tiger Lake in single-core. However, there is a processor that still beats AMD's Cezanne.
Hardware enthusiast @Tum_Apisak found two Geekbench 5 results from the Asus ROG Flow X13. The gaming notebook runs the eight-core Ryzen 9 5980HS at a 3.30 GHz default clock speed and can boost it all the way to a 4.53 GHz. In one case, AMD's Cezanne APU hit a 1,532 single-core score and 8,219 multi-core score. In another case, the processor finished with 1,541 single-core points and 8,224 multi-core points.
| CPU | Single-Core | Multi-Core | Cores/Threads, uArch | Cache | Clocks | TDP | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Ryzen 9 5980HS | 1540 | 8,225 | 8C/16T, Zen 3 | 16MB | 3.30 ~ 4.53 GHz | 35W | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6027200 |
| AMD Ryzen 9 4900H | 1230 | 7,125 | 8C/16T, Zen 2 | 8MB | 3.30 ~ 4.44 GHz | 35~54W | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6028856 |
| Intel Core i9-10885H | 1335 | 7,900 | 8C/16T, Skylake | 16MB | 2.40 ~ 5.08 GHz | 45W | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6006773 |
| Intel Core i7-1185G7 | 1550 | 5,600 | 4C/8T, Willow Cove | 12MB | 3.0 ~ 4.80 GHz | 28W | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/5644005 |
| Apple M1 | 1710 | 7,660 | 4C Firestorm + 4C Icestorm | 12MB + 4MB | 3.20 GHz | 20~24W | https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/6038094 |
Typically, Cezanne looks very good compared to previous-generation AMD and Intel architectures. The most interesting comparison we can make with a Zen 3 APU is with an Intel Willow Cove processor. Since Intel hasn't launched its eight-core Tiger Lake-H chips yet, quad-core Core i7 1100-series "Tiger Lake-U" processors are the only available CPUs featuring the Willow Cove microarchitecture. These CPUs are not quite meant for gaming machines and, therefore, come inside notebooks with less sophisticated cooling.
Generally, Intel Core i7-1185G7-based machines score 1,350-1450 single-core points on Geekbench 5. A well-cooled example can hit around 1,550 on a single core and about 5,600 on multi-cores.
Therefore, it looks like mobile CPUs featuring AMD's Zen 3 and Intel's Willow Cove cores have comparable single-core performance (assuming that both are cooled properly). Naturally, AMD's eight-core gaming APU naturally beats Intel's quad-core CPU in workloads leveraging multiple cores.
As far as Geekbench 5 results go, AMD's Ryzen 9 5980HS looks like a very potent mobile APU with a 35W TDP. Yet, it's not unbeatable.
Apple's tiny M1 system-on-chip (SoC) running at 3.20 GHz scored 11% better than the Ryzen 9 5980HS in single-core workloads and 7% worse in multi-core workloads while consuming about 30% less power, assuming that its TDP is up to 24W.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
AMD's eight-core Ryzen 9 4900H "Renoir" APUs, based on the Zen 2 microarchitecture, scores about 1,230 single-core points and around 7,100 multi-core points when running at 3.30 / 4.44 GHz clocks in Geekbench 5. Therefore, the new Cezanne APU is apparently 25% faster than its Renoir predecessor in single-core tasks and about 15% faster in multi-core workloads.
Cezanne's noticeably higher performance compared to its predecessor can be explained by microarchitectural improvements, as well as a two times larger L2 cache. The Ryzen 94900H is rated for up to a 54W TDP, whereas the new one has a default TDP of 35W.
A comparison of the new numbers for the Ryzen 9 5980HS to Intel's eight-core Core i9-10885H, Intel's fastest mobile Comet Lake CPU with a locked multiplier, suggests the Ryzen 9 5980HS is 15% faster in single-core workloads and 4% faster in multi-core tasks.
It should be noted that the Ryzen 9 5980HS numbers haven't been confirmed, so you should take them with a grain of salt.
Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.
-
gg83 Can anyone explain how the M1 is so good at less power? Is x86 just that bad for certain benchmarks? Could the ARM based cpu be designed for high benchmark scores?Reply -
deksman ReplyJayNor said:Wouldn't a Tiger Lake-H35 be a more appropriate comparison chip?
They are still 4c/8th CPU's (which is quite frankly pathetic for Intel).
Still, here are the results:
https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-quad-core-tiger-lake-i7-11370h-and-i5-11300h-processors-spotted#:~:text=At%20Geekbench%20two%20processors%20of,points%20in%20the%20multi%2Dcore.
The Core i7-11370H appears to have a base clock of 3.3 GHz and a boost clock of 4.8 GHz. The CPU scored 1572 in the single-core benchmark and 5065 points in the multi-core.
So overall, a tiny proverbial advantage at single core performance (mainly due to higher boost clocks), and bad multi-core score (compared to AMD).
If I'm reading those numbers correctly, the 11370H scores LOWER than the above tested CPU in the article... and that doesn't paint a good picture for Intel (especially when you consider the fact AMD has TWICE the cores and only slightly higher power consumption). -
hotaru251 Reply
it comes down to how they deal with their data handling.gg83 said:Can anyone explain how the M1 is so good at less power? Is x86 just that bad for certain benchmarks? Could the ARM based cpu be designed for high benchmark scores?
basically ARM has less steps than x86.
less steps = faster results.
think of it like a road.
a slower car can go on a straight road and still beat a faster car that takes a road filled with sharp turns. -
Makaveli Replygg83 said:Can anyone explain how the M1 is so good at less power? Is x86 just that bad for certain benchmarks? Could the ARM based cpu be designed for high benchmark scores?
https://hothardware.com/news/ex-intel-engineer-slams-apple-m1-benchmarking-practices
I would wait to see more than synthetic benchmarks before putting all my eggs in that basket. -
ingtar33 Reply
it depends on the benchmark. Greekbench is a terrible test bench, which has been credibly accused of a heavy pro-intel bias in the past, furthermore while it claims it's a cross platform benching program, it's testing has NEVER accurately portrayed cross OS performance. meaning an ARM chip's results are credible against other ARM chips running the same OS, once you start comparing across OS platforms (windows vs iOS vs Andriod) geekbench results turn to trash; which is a shame because geekbench is supposed to be a cross platform result.gg83 said:Can anyone explain how the M1 is so good at less power? Is x86 just that bad for certain benchmarks? Could the ARM based cpu be designed for high benchmark scores? -
Bentheegg Reply
-5nmgg83 said:Can anyone explain how the M1 is so good at less power? Is x86 just that bad for certain benchmarks? Could the ARM based cpu be designed for high benchmark scores?
- the cores are actually huge, almost twice the zen3s -
gg83 Reply
Is it 7nm vs 5nm vs 10nm? That could definitely be a factorBentheegg said:-5nm
- the cores are actually huge, almost twice the zen3s