After reporting on the Ryzen 9 4900HS, we're going to test the AMD Ryzen 7 4800H laptop processor today. While the 4900HS was definitely a very interesting part, it is unlikely to be as widespread as the 4800H, which is targeting a mainstream market. So today's review will look at what is probably the most popular Ryzen H-series APU among buyers and laptop models from different brands.
The Ryzen 7 4800H is equipped with a standard TDP of 45 W instead of the lower AMD targets of 35 W for its HS series premium SKUs. However, the clock speeds between 4800H and 4900HS are similar with a base of 3.0 GHz and a boost of 4.3 GHz for the 4900HS compared to 2.9 GHz and 4.2 GHz for the 4800H. The cache size is the same at 8 MB L3, and of course we get 8 cores and 16 threads. In essence, the 4900HS is set to at least theoretically offer similar performance to the 4800H with less power consumption.
The other major difference between the two CPUS is the integrated graphics. The Ryzen 9 comes with a fully unlocked Vega GPU with 8 processing units and a maximum frequency of 1750 MHz. The Ryzen 7 4800H now has 7 processing units that are clocked at 1600 MHz. There is a difference on paper, but we don't expect H-series laptops to come onto the market without a discrete GPU coupling, which is controversial.
To test the Ryzen 7 4800H, we bought an Asus TUF Gaming A15 laptop that is widely used in the United States. It's actually good value for money for just $ 1,000. It comes with 4800H, 16 GB DDR4 memory and a discrete GTX 1660 Ti GPU with 80 W. There is also an RTX 2060 model for a little extra. You also get a 15-inch 1080p display, a basic design with no obvious flaws, in an apparently suitable mid-range gaming laptop.
A few brief notes on the test setup. In this test, you see a number of different laptop CPUs in the diagrams and sometimes GPU configurations. The data in the diagrams are an average of the laptops that we tested with the specified hardware. The full list of laptops tested can be found here.
Testing laptop components can be more difficult than testing desktops because each configuration can vary in terms of cooling and other hardware. These averages are therefore intended to illustrate the performance of a "typical" system. The average score excludes models with single-channel memory or other situations in which the existing components are severely throttled. We did our best to create data from apple to apple where possible.
We also operate every laptop with the default settings and unless otherwise stated. For Intel CPUs, this generally means a long-term PL1 limitation of 45 W and for AMD processors 45 W at 4800H and 35 W at 4900HS and 3750H.
Based on Cinebench R20, we know that Ryzen 4000 performs well with this workload. However, the 4800H works slightly different than the 4900HS. With a higher TDP and a longer boost, the 4800H is ~ 2% faster in multithread, but 2% slower in single core mode. The higher boost frequency of the 4900HS seems to make a difference here.
It is not a competition against Intel CPUs. The 4800H is 47% faster than the Intel Core i7-10875H and around 67% faster than the Core i7-9750H. The only way that parts of the Intel H-series can get close is to throw the performance limits out of the window. Even at 90 W with an 8 core i9-9880H, it cannot keep up with the 4800H. The AMD option is still 15% faster.
The latest parts from Intel offer a single-thread performance advantage, especially over the 4800H. This APU is 3% behind the 10875H, although it surpasses the 9750H, which is not as high as the 10875H.
The results of the old Cinebench R15 test hardly change. The 4800H doesn't dominate as much as the Cinebench R20 and falls behind the 4900HS here, but still has a significant lead over the Intel Core i7 processors. Yes, we don't have the Core i7-10750H in these diagrams yet, although we've just received one to test this week and expect it to work similarly to the 9750H, but we'll see that soon.
Handbrake is another workload that benefits from AMD's faster multithreaded performance. The 4800H is 32% faster than the Core i7-10875H and 56% faster than the Core i7-9750H. If you want to use your laptop for video encoding or transcoding on the go, there is currently no better option on the market than Ryzen. In a test that lasted more than 30 minutes, the 4800H is 5% ahead of the 4900HS: Despite a lower base clock, its higher TDP enables higher clock rates in practice.
The 4800H offers a significant advantage in decompression over Intel CPUs. We expect a performance advantage of 32% over the 10875H. However, compression is not the strength of this Ryzen APU. It is 9% behind the 8 core part of Intel. In both cases, the 4800H is superior to the often similarly expensive Core i7-9750H from Intel.
Another workload where we see equivalent performance between 4800H and 4900HS is Microsoft Excel in a data-intensive table. While the 4800H is 8% faster than the Core i7-9750H, it is 8% slower than the 10875H. Depending on which two laptops you are exchanging between, Intel may have an advantage.
Blender is another multithreaded workload that runs very well on Ryzen, 44% ahead of the Core i7-10875H and 73% ahead of the Core i7-9750H. As with video encoding, there is no reason to choose Intel if you want to do CPU-based rendering tasks and use an application that has a lot of threads.
A new productivity test that we're introducing is compiling code, in this case compiling GCC. This workload is a mixture of sections with multiple threads and sections with one thread and takes quite a while. Compared to Ryzen and Intel, the Ryzen 7 4800H is significantly faster than the previous results: 27% faster than the i7-10875H and 56% faster than the i7-9750H.
When testing with the PCMark 10 test for lower productivity, we find that the 4800H is 14% faster than the 9750H and 3% faster than the 10875H, while falling slightly behind the Ryzen 9 4900HS. The edges shrink a bit in the Essentials test and now place the 10875H due to the increasing single-core usage.
The MATLAB performance is even between the Ryzen 7 4800H and the Core i7-10875H with R2020a and the integrated benchmark and is almost 10% ahead of the 9750H. This makes Ryzen a decent choice for engineers, but it's not the same overwhelming winner as other multi-threaded workloads.
Exporting Acrobat PDF is one of the most difficult tests for Ryzen as it is completely single-threaded. The 4800H is 16% behind the 10875H, while it corresponds to the 9750H. We have now seen several times that pure single-thread workloads are a weakness of the 4800H, which only clocks up to 4.2 GHz.
AES encryption performance still speaks strongly for AMD, where you can see an increase in this workload of up to 35% over Intel's competition.
In Photoshop Iris Blur we see an equivalent performance between the Ryzen 7 4800H and the Ryzen 9 4900HS. The CPUs are ~ 6% slower than the 10875H, but 7% faster than the 9750H. Ryzen also lags behind Intel in Puget's Photoshop benchmark, although it should be noted here that the GPU has little influence in some tests.
The use of DaVinci Resolve for benchmarking has been requested, so we are adding it to this review for the first time on Puget's workload. DaVinci benefits enormously from the GPU performance and often the performance is determined more by the GPU than by the CPU. When comparing identical GPU configurations, the 4800H was clearly 21% ahead of the 9750H. This is not as much leeway as we saw between the two processors. However, given the app's high computing power, this is a promising sign for those who edit videos in Resolve.
I also think that the 1660 Ti in our test system is usually about 20% slower than the RTX 2070 Super Max-Q in our 10875H test system, the Gigabyte Aorus 15G, while our Ryzen configuration is only 12% slower. Since the Aorus system is more than twice as expensive, the calculation value for Resolve pages with these mid-range Ryzen systems is as high as Intel is unable to offer 8 cores at this price point. Of course, those who want absolute performance have to choose Intel, while Ryzen systems don't have powerful discrete graphics.
Let's finish the productivity tests with a look at Premiere. I chose the single-pass encoding that we normally display because Adobe recently introduced beta accelerated encoding for Nvidia and AMD GPUs with Premiere 14.2.0. Until now, this function was only limited to Intel QuickSync. This was a reason to buy an Intel laptop through AMD. Since this advantage will no longer be available in the next version of Premiere, it no longer makes sense to recommend Intel for QuickSync in Premiere.
A quick look at the performance of Premiere 14.2.0 with hardware accelerated coding on our discrete Nvidia GPU shows that the Ryzen 7 4800H performs 13% better in laptops with the same GPU than the Core i7-9750H, at least in the export test from Puget, while it matches the Core i7-10875H with a faster GPU.
Other tests show that the Ryzen 7 4800H performs well in Premiere. With 2-pass encodings without hardware acceleration, Ryzen holds the performance crown, which is not a surprise after what we've seen in other multithreaded workloads. Ryzen is also faster for using features like the Warp Stabilizer and is 20% ahead of the 10875H and 23% ahead of the 9750H. For live playback of media in the timeline, the 4800H corresponds at least to the Core i7 CPUs from Intel, which we tested in the beta version of Premiere.
Where are the game results?
At that point we were hoping to be able to record some gaming performance numbers, but we encountered some anomalies in the test systems we used. Instead of further delaying this review, we'll be revisiting 4800H Gaming shortly.
We wanted to make sure the numbers were 100% accurate before we publish them. This involves the rather lengthy process of checking with OEMs to make sure everything works perfectly.
This review was carried out extensively to get a full view of productivity performance. However, you can be sure that if we can be sure that the numbers reflect the real, final experience, we will be back with a proper investigation of the Ryzen 4000 games.
Ryzen 7 4800H against Core i7-9750H
Here are some general comparisons between the Ryzen 7 4800H and other major CPUs it will compete with. First, we have the Core i7-9750H, which we expect to be close in performance to the newer Core i7-10750H. Together with the same GPU, the 4800H was universally faster, often with large profit margins. For long-term multithreaded tasks like handbrake, blender, or code compilation, the 4800H was over 60% faster, making it an obvious choice for anyone doing such things on their laptop.
But even with more GPU workloads like Premiere (with correct acceleration), DaVinci Resolve or Photoshop, the 4800H with the same 1660 Ti was able to keep a performance advantage in the systems. And then we saw everything from lower productivity to 10% better performance or higher in lower productivity tasks. The comparison of these two CPUs, which are in the same price range, is dominant for AMD.
Ryzen 7 4800H vs. Core i7-10875H
The comparison of the 4800H with the 10875H is somewhat different in that the AMD 4800H does not include the single-thread performance crown. With such workloads, it's typically about 10% slower than Intel's new 8-core offering. However, the 4800H is still by far the best choice for multithreaded workloads and offers 20 to 40 percent more performance. For encoding videos that can have a significant impact on how productive you are with your laptop.
Ryzen 7 4800H vs. Core i9-9880H
Intel is struggling to compete with AMD's 45W offering, even at best when the Core i9-9880H is operating at 90W. The 4800H is still 5 to 15 percent faster with longer workloads, which underlines AMD's superior efficiency.
Ryzen 7 4800H vs. Ryzen 9 4900HS
And finally, let's take a look between the Ryzen 7 4800H and the Ryzen 9 4900HS, a fight between 45 W and 35 W. The 4900HS is pretty impressive here, especially in some short-term and single-threaded tests where it is slightly faster is. With longer-term workloads, however, we see that the 4800H is about 5% faster. Given the 29% performance difference, it's impressive that the 4900HS offers almost the same performance as the 4800H. And it's not that the 4800H is inefficient or anything, it's way better than Intel's processors, only the 4900HS is a step better again.
Our final thoughts on the Ryzen 7 4800H are similar to those we said in the 4900HS test because the two parts are very close in terms of performance. The 4800H is an extremely impressive APU for productivity. It delivers multithreaded performance that is beyond what Intel can offer, while being more efficient. Intel's 14nm process technology is simply not up to date for this type of task compared to TSMC on 7nm process.
In our Ryzen 9 4900HS test, we spent some time examining some of the disadvantages of AMD's 8-core compared to Intel's 8-core, including the fact that top-end single-thread performance is not fully available and there are some cache and latency restrictions. That still applies if you compete the 4800H against the Core i7-10875H, but we think that this comparison is almost irrelevant when examining the market.
The Ryzen 7 4800H does not currently compete with the Core i7-10875H. Laptops using the i7-10875H start at $ 1,800. In the meantime, the 4800H is competing with cheaper laptops equipped with Intel's six-core offerings for the i7-9750H and i7-10750H, and we've just seen that the 4800H can easily beat the 9750H across the board . At some point, the Ryzen 7 4800H could of course become a premium option for the i7-10875H, that should be interesting.
There are still question marks about how many Ryzen 4000 options will be on the market and how easy it will be to buy one. Ryzen 7 4800H systems are in high demand right now, and basically everything is sold out. In the three weeks since we first looked at the 4900HS, we haven't heard of many other systems coming onto the market.
Frankly, we can understand some of the concerns on the OEM side. The Ryzen 7 3750H was not a good laptop APU, it was significantly slower than the Intel Core i7. So it seems reasonable to see how these new Zen 2 options work and how they are received by the public. But now we know they're good, the 4800H is more than twice as fast as the 3750H, and judging from comments everywhere, people want Ryzen laptops. It is up to the OEMs to achieve this.