Best Laptop CPU? AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 185H

Summary

This video compares Intel and AMD processors in laptops, focusing on gaming performance, battery life, and efficiency. The AMD processor excels in battery life, rendering tasks, and lower power efficiency, while Intel shows strength in single-core performance and integrated graphics for gaming. The script also discusses the importance of considering the price-to-performance ratio and the impact of integrated graphics on thinner laptops. The conclusion suggests AMD's overall better performance, especially in non-gaming tasks and lower power scenarios.

Takeaways

• 🔋 AMD laptops generally have better battery life compared to Intel, with the AMD version lasting 35% longer in the YouTube video playback test.
• ⚡️ AMD processors show better performance on battery power, maintaining an 8% lead in multicore performance over Intel in Cinebench 2024 tests.
• 💻 In terms of power efficiency, AMD CPUs are more power efficient at all power levels, achieving higher Cinebench Multicore scores with less power.
• 🎮 For gaming, there's no significant difference in performance between AMD and Intel in most games tested, with AMD showing a slight edge in some titles.
• 💾 AMD's integrated graphics outperform Intel's, especially in games like Cyberpunk 2077, providing a smoother gaming experience.
• 🌡️ Despite using less power, AMD laptops ran hotter, but the Intel laptop felt warmer to the touch, indicating different thermal management approaches.
• 📊 In non-gaming workloads, AMD CPUs performed better, particularly in rendering tasks, with significant leads in applications like Blender and V-Ray.
• 💰 At the time of the review, the AMD version of the ASUS Zephyrus G16 was priced higher but included double the RAM compared to the Intel version.
• 🏁 Intel's Meteor Lake processors showed some performance issues in specific games like Red Dead Redemption 2, where AMD had a 10% lead.
• 🆕 Intel's newer Lunar Lake processors, while not targeted for gaming laptops, promise higher single-core performance and better integrated graphics.

Q & A

What are the key differences between Intel and AMD processors mentioned in the script?

The script highlights that Intel processors offer more total CPU cores but fewer threads due to the lack of hyperthreading on their E cores, while AMD's Zen 5c cores do support hyperthreading. Both have a 5.1GHz max single core boost and 24MB of L3 cache. They also both support LPDDR5X memory, with AMD allowing slightly faster RAM speeds.

How does battery life compare between Intel and AMD laptops in the test?

The AMD laptop outperformed the Intel one in battery life, lasting almost 12 hours in the YouTube video playback test compared to the Intel laptop's nearly 9 hours, which is a 35% longer battery life for the AMD version.

What was the performance difference when running on battery power?

When running on battery power, the AMD processor scored 11% higher in the Cinebench 2024 multicore test with chargers connected. At battery power, AMD still led in multicore performance with an 8% lead, while Intel took the lead in single core performance with a small gap.

How does AMD's power efficiency compare to Intel's in the tests?

AMD's processors were found to be more power efficient at all power levels, able to achieve higher Cinebench Multicore scores with less power. At a 15-watt TDP, AMD scored 69% higher in multicore performance compared to Intel.

What was the performance difference in various applications like Blender, V-Ray, and MATLAB?

AMD showed a significant lead in applications like Blender and V-Ray, with a 39% faster completion time in Blender at 35 watts and substantial leads in V-Ray and Corona rendering workloads. However, MATLAB performed better on Intel, making it a better choice for heavy MATLAB users.

How did the integrated graphics performance compare between Intel and AMD?

AMD's integrated graphics were substantially faster, with a 70% lead in Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080p high settings, making it usable at nearly 60 FPS, whereas Intel was significantly slower.

What was the average gaming performance difference between Intel and AMD processors across 20 games?

On average, there was no significant difference in gaming performance between the two processors across 20 games tested at 1080p, with AMD being only 0.35% faster. At 1440p, AMD showed a slight advantage with an average lead of 1.6%.

How do the prices of the ASUS Zephyrus G16 laptops with Intel and AMD processors compare?

At the time of recording, the AMD version of the ASUS Zephyrus G16 with RTX 4070 graphics was priced at $2300 USD, while the Intel version with half the RAM was at $2000 USD. However, the Intel version in the US only has 16GB of memory, unlike the 32GB in the tested model.

What are the recommendations for laptop buyers considering the Intel and AMD processors?

For gaming performance, either processor will suffice as the difference is minimal. However, AMD offers better battery life, performance in non-gaming workloads, and integrated graphics, especially beneficial in thinner laptops with lower power limits.

What is the script's stance on Intel's newer Lunar Lake processors in comparison to AMD?

The script suggests that Intel's newer Lunar Lake processors, while having higher single core performance and better integrated graphics, may not be competitive for multicore performance and may not be used in gaming laptops according to one large brand's plans.

Outlines

00:00

💻 CPU Comparison for Gaming Laptops

The script compares Intel and AMD processors in gaming laptops, focusing on various aspects such as gaming performance, thermals, power draw, battery life, and integrated graphics. It mentions that Intel offers more total CPU cores but fewer threads due to the lack of hyperthreading on their E cores, while AMD's Zen 5c cores have hyperthreading. Both CPUs have a 5.1GHz max single core boost and 24MB of L3 cache, and support LPDDR5X memory, with AMD allowing slightly faster RAM speeds. The testing was done on two identical ASUS Zephyrus G16 laptops with the only difference being the CPUs. The AMD laptop had better battery life, lasting 35% longer than the Intel one in a YouTube video playback test. AMD also showed better performance on battery power in multicore tests. The script discusses power efficiency, with AMD showing higher multicore scores in Cinebench with less power. The testing was done at 35 and 80 watts to represent different laptop types. AMD's performance per watt was better, and despite running hotter, the Intel laptop felt warmer externally. Clock speeds varied, with AMD reaching higher speeds possibly due to fewer cores sharing power.

05:02

🎮 Gaming and Application Performance

The script discusses the performance of Intel and AMD processors in various applications and games. In Blender, AMD was faster at both 35 and 80 watts. In rendering workloads like V-Ray and Corona, AMD also showed significant leads. However, MATLAB performed better on Intel. 7-Zip compression and decompression tests favored AMD, especially at 35 watts. Crossmark showed Intel to be faster, while Handbrake and Adobe Premiere Pro favored AMD, though the leads were smaller. Adobe Photoshop and Geekbench also leaned towards AMD. The script summarizes that AMD was generally faster in most tests at lower power levels, but the performance gap closed at higher power levels. AI performance could not be compared due to a lack of benchmarks. Gaming tests at 1080p and 1440p resolutions showed little difference in performance between the two CPUs, with AMD having a slight edge in some games like Red Dead Redemption 2. The script also mentions that the CPU difference matters less at higher resolutions where games are more GPU-bound.

10:04

💸 Pricing and Value Considerations

The script compares the pricing and value of the ASUS Zephyrus G16 laptops with Intel and AMD CPUs. It notes that the AMD version costs $2300 USD with an RTX 4070 GPU and 32GB of RAM, while the Intel version costs $2000 USD but only comes with 16GB of RAM in the US. The Intel version has been available for sale at a much cheaper price, making it better value from a cost per frame perspective. The script suggests that for gaming performance, either CPU would suffice, but AMD's CPU offers better battery life and performance in non-gaming workloads, especially rendering tasks. AMD's integrated graphics also provide better performance for laptops without discrete graphics. The script concludes that while Intel may currently offer better value, AMD's CPU is a better choice for thinner laptops with lower power limits and for those who need better integrated graphics.

15:05

🔍 Final Thoughts on CPU Selection

The script concludes with final thoughts on choosing between Intel and AMD CPUs for laptops. It reiterates that for gaming, the performance difference is minor, and one could choose based on price. However, AMD's CPU offers better battery life and performance in non-gaming tasks, especially at lower power levels. The script also mentions Intel's newer Lunar Lake CPU, which may have better single-core performance and integrated graphics but may not be competitive in multicore performance. It suggests that for smaller and lighter laptops, one should check benchmarks for Intel's Lunar Lake once released to compare with AMD. The script ends by reminding viewers that there are many factors to consider when buying a laptop, not just the CPU, and encourages them to check out a full review of the ASUS Zephyrus G16 for more insights.

Keywords

💡CPU

CPU stands for Central Processing Unit, which is the primary component of a computer that performs most of the processing inside the computer. In the context of the video, the CPU is a critical factor in determining the performance of a laptop, particularly in gaming and other compute-intensive tasks. The script compares Intel and AMD processors, highlighting the differences in core count, threads, and performance, which are all attributes of the CPU.

💡Intel

Intel is a major technology company known for its processors, which are integral to many computers and laptops. In the video, Intel's processors are compared against AMD's, with a focus on their performance in gaming laptops. The script mentions Intel's offering of more total CPU cores but less threads due to the lack of hyperthreading on their efficiency (E) cores.

💡AMD

AMD is another leading semiconductor company that produces CPUs and GPUs. The video contrasts AMD's processors with Intel's, emphasizing AMD's power efficiency, longer battery life, and superior performance in certain applications and games. AMD's Zen 5 architecture is specifically highlighted as being more power efficient and offering better integrated graphics.

💡Cinebench

Cinebench is a benchmarking software that assesses the performance of a CPU. It is used in the video to compare the multicore processing capabilities of Intel and AMD processors. The script reports Cinebench scores to demonstrate the performance differences when the laptops are plugged in and running on battery power.

💡Battery Life

Battery life refers to the duration a laptop can run on a single charge. The video discusses how AMD laptops typically have better battery life compared to Intel, with the AMD version in the test lasting 35% longer during a YouTube video playback test. This is a significant factor for users who require portable computing without frequent charging.

💡Power Efficiency

Power efficiency is a measure of how effectively a device uses power. In the context of the video, power efficiency is discussed in relation to how well the CPUs perform at different power limits. The script shows that AMD's processors are more power efficient at all power levels, achieving higher performance with less power consumption.

💡Thermals

Thermals in computing refer to the heat generated by components, particularly the CPU and GPU. The video script mentions thermals in the context of comparing the temperatures of the laptops during testing. Effective thermal management is crucial for maintaining performance and preventing damage due to overheating.

💡Integrated Graphics

Integrated graphics refers to the graphics processing unit (GPU) that is built into the CPU. The video compares the integrated graphics performance of Intel and AMD processors, with AMD showing significantly better performance in games like Cyberpunk 2077 when running on integrated graphics alone.

💡Gaming Laptops

Gaming laptops are specifically designed for gaming and typically have more powerful hardware than standard laptops. The video focuses on the performance of Intel and AMD processors in gaming laptops, testing them across various games and scenarios to determine which provides better gaming experiences.

💡Software Benchmarks

Software benchmarks are tests that measure the performance of hardware or software. The video uses benchmarks like Cinebench, Blender, and others to evaluate the performance of Intel and AMD processors in various computing tasks. These benchmarks help provide a standardized comparison of the processors' capabilities.

💡Power Limit

Power limit in the context of the video refers to the maximum amount of power that can be supplied to the CPU. The script discusses how adjusting the power limit affects performance and heat generation. The ASUS Armory Crate software allows for control over the power limit, which influences both performance and thermals.

Highlights

Comparison of Intel and AMD processors in various aspects such as gaming, applications, thermals, power draw, battery life, and integrated graphics.

Intel offers more total CPU cores but less threads due to the lack of hyperthreading on E cores, while AMD's Zen 5c cores have hyperthreading.

Both CPUs have a 5.1GHz max single core boost and 24MB of L3 cache, supporting LPDDR5X memory with AMD allowing slightly faster RAM speeds.

Fair testing conducted using two identical ASUS Zephyrus G16 gaming laptops with the only difference being the CPUs.

AMD laptops typically have better battery life, with the AMD version lasting 35% longer in video playback test compared to Intel.

AMD processor scores 11% higher in Cinebench 2024 multicore test when both CPUs are plugged in, and maintains an 8% lead on battery power.

Intel leads in single core performance on battery power, but the gap is small.

AMD is more power efficient at all power levels, reaching higher Cinebench Multicore scores with less power.

AMD's new processor shows better performance per watt, performing better while using less power.

AMD laptop runs hotter despite using less power, but the Intel machine feels hotter on the outside.

AMD's lower and higher powered cores reach higher clock speeds than Intel, possibly due to fewer cores sharing the power budget.

AMD completes Blender tasks faster than Intel at both 35 watts and 80 watts.

AMD shows significant wins in rendering workloads like V-Ray and Corona.

Intel performs better in MATLAB, while AMD excels in 7-Zip compression and decompression.

Crossmark test shows Intel 24% faster at 35 watts, but AMD faster in Handbrake video transcoding.

AMD has a subtle lead in video editing with Adobe Premiere and DaVinci Resolve.

AMD is 12% faster in Adobe Photoshop at 35 watts and 7% faster at 80 watts.

AMD is 10% faster in Geekbench single core tests and has less multicore performance gap at higher power levels.

AMD's integrated graphics outperform Intel's by a significant margin in games like Cyberpunk 2077.

Pricing comparison shows AMD's laptop costs more but includes double the RAM, affecting value for money considerations.

AMD's better battery life and performance in non-gaming workloads, especially rendering tasks, make it a compelling choice.

For gaming performance, the choice between Intel and AMD processors is minor, but AMD's integrated graphics provide a significant advantage in thin laptops.

Transcripts

Don’t buy the wrong CPU in your next laptop!

I’ve compared these Intel and AMD processors in  20 games, applications, thermals, power draw,  

battery life, integrated graphics and  more to help you make the right choice!

Intel are offering more total CPU cores,  but less threads, as their E cores don’t  

have hyperthreading, while AMD’s lower  powered Zen 5c cores do. Both CPUs have  

a 5.1GHz max single core boost and 24mb of  L3 cache. They both support LPDDR5X memory,  

though AMD allows for slightly faster RAM speed.

I’ve got two ASUS Zephyrus G16 gaming laptops  to do this testing as fairly as possible.  

These laptops are exactly the same with the only  difference being the CPUs. They have the same GPU,  

same RAM capacity, same cooling,  same battery, same everything.

Battery life is an area where AMD laptops  typically do better compared to Intel,  

and that’s the case here too. Don’t get  me wrong, the Intel laptop almost lasted  

for 9 hours in our YouTube video playback  test, which is a great result for a gaming  

laptop. But the AMD version almost  lasted for 12 hours, or 35% longer.

Performance while running on battery power is  another area where AMD often does better too.  

With the chargers connected, the AMD processor  was scoring 11% higher in the Cinebench 2024  

multicore test. But if we unplug the chargers  and run off of battery power instead, the AMD  

laptop was still faster than Intel in multi core,  though with a slightly smaller 8% lead. Intel  

took the lead for single core performance  on battery power, but the gap is small.

So not only does the AMD laptop last  longer when running on battery power,  

but it also performs better  when running on battery too.

ASUS’s Armory Crate software gives us the  option to control the power limit of both  

CPUs. More power equals more performance,  but also more heat - and a higher power bill.

We can see how much different power limits matter  here, give me a second to explain what’s going  

on. The blue line shows Intel’s Core Ultra  9 185H, while the red line shows AMD’s Ryzen  

AI 9 HX 370. I’ve tested both processors in 5  watt power increments between 15 and 80 watts,  

though the software allowed the  Intel laptop to go up to 90 watts.

Basically this shows that AMD is more  power efficient at all power levels.  

The AMD laptop is able to reach a higher  Cinebench Multicore score with less power.

Here are the actual Cinebench scores. So  with just a 15 watt TDP set on both laptops,  

AMD was scoring 69% higher in multi  core performance, nice. Intel needs  

a higher 25 watt power limit to score the  same as AMD at 15 watts. But then once we  

get up to a higher 80 watt power limit, AMD  only had an 11% lead. So still a clear win,  

but based on this, AMD’s new processor is  more power efficient at lower power levels.

Now these bigger 16 inch gaming laptops  I’ve tested have no problems running their  

CPUs at 80 watts. But smaller and thinner  notebooks will have less room for cooling,  

which means lower power limits. And ultimately  performance comes down to how much power the  

laptop is able to feed the processor, which is  why I always report it in my laptop reviews.

With that in mind, the rest of the testing  has been done at either 35 or 80 watts to  

represent lower and higher end laptops.  Both CPUs performed very closely in terms  

of single core performance,  just a slight lead with AMD.

Both laptops were using a similar amount of  power when measured at the wall. AMD was a  

few watts behind, which isn’t unexpected  as Intel and AMD measure TDP differently,  

so setting the same values in  software isn’t exactly the same.  

But these results confirm it’s not too  different in terms of real power use.

This gives AMD a better performance per watt  result, whether we’re running with a lower  

or higher CPU power limit. The AMD laptop  is just more efficient in this workload,  

as it’s performing better while using less power.

Interestingly the AMD laptop was running  hotter despite using less power, but this  

isn’t actually a fair comparison. Both processors  have their sensors placed in different parts of  

the chip and report different things, so this  isn’t comparable, but it’s the best we can do.

Actually, maybe this is. The Intel laptop was  slightly warmer to the touch in its hot spots  

shown in red. So although software tells  us AMD is hotter, in the real world the  

Intel machine felt hotter on the outside,  which is what it really comes down to.

Both laptops have the exact same cooling  system inside, and I ran this test with  

fans maxed out at the same speed to keep  the results consistent and comparable.

Likewise clock speeds aren’t really comparable,  but here’s what we’re dealing with. AMD’s lower  

and higher powered cores are reaching higher  clock speeds than Intel, probably because the  

AMD processor has fewer cores to share its  power budget with. Intel needs to spread the  

same power over more cores, which means lower  clocks on average in this multicore workload.

Alright, let’s check out some other  applications before we get into the games!

Blender was tested with the Classroom test,  and AMD was completing the task 39% faster  

than Intel at 35 watts, or 23% faster at 80  watts. So again, there’s a bigger lead for  

AMD with less power. Intel catches up a little at  80 watts, but the newer AMD chip has an easy win.

V-Ray and Corona are more rendering workloads,  

and like Blender, these saw some of the  biggest wins for AMD out of all apps tested.

MATLAB on the other hand was faster  with Intel, so if you’re using this  

program a lot then Intel’s 185H may make more  sense if you’re after the best performance.

I’ve used 7-Zip to test compression and  decompression, and this workload ran better  

with AMD. With both CPUs running at 80 watts AMD  was only 3% faster when it came to compression,  

but decompression had a larger 18%  lead. But like most other tests,  

the gap is wider at 35 watts, with AMD 37% ahead  in decompression and 20% ahead in compression.

Crossmark tests a bunch of different things that  

they claim represent real world workloads.  This includes things like AES encryption,  

compression, SQLite database lookups,  rendering frames, video tracking,  

face recognition and more. Anyway Intel was 24%  faster at 35 watts here, or 9% ahead at 80 watts.

AMD was faster when using Handbrake  to transcode one of my videos,  

completing the task 25% faster at  35 watts, or 7% faster at 80 watts.

Video editing with Adobe Premiere worked  better with AMD too, though the gap is  

much smaller with the AMD laptop  only scoring 2% better at 80 watts,  

or 5% better at 35 watts - one of the smallest  differences out of all applications tested.

That goes for video editing  with DaVinci Resolve too,  

at least at 80 watts where AMD only had  a subtle lead. But at the lower 35 watt  

power limit AMD was scoring 12% higher  than Intel. Not a massive lead compared  

to some of the other workloads like 3D  rendering, but hey, winning’s winning.

Adobe Photoshop tends to perform better in  this test with higher single core performance,  

and AMD was 12% faster at 35 watts  or 7% faster at 80 watts. So again,  

not a massive difference, but a clear win for AMD.

Geekbench tests a bunch of different  workloads and is one of the few tests  

we have that has a single core component. AMD was  10% faster in that regard at both power levels,  

with less of a gap in multicore performance  when both processors get more power.

AMD ends up almost 17% faster than  Intel on average out of the specific  

applications I’ve tested when both are  power limited to 35 watts. Each bar on  

this graph shows how much faster  or slower AMD was against Intel,  

so Intel really dominated in MATLAB and  whatever real world applications Crossmark  

claims to be testing. But AMD wins by a fair  margin in most tests at lower power levels.

That margin lowers with both processors running  at 80 watts, but AMD still won with a 7% lead on  

average in the same workloads. Again Intel only  was only better in the same tests as before,  

but there are more applications that have a  smaller difference with the higher power limit.

That’s not too surprising based on the  power scaling results from earlier,  

as AMD was more power efficient at  lower power levels. The performance  

gap closes once they’re fed more power.

As for AI, both of these laptops have an NPU,  

so dedicated hardware for accelerating  AI workloads, with AMD’s being better  

according to the spec sheet. But it’s  still early days in the AI world, there  

just aren’t any real benchmarks and that many  real workloads that I can use to compare them.

Alright, but what about gaming?  We’ve tested both laptops at 1080p  

and 1440p resolutions in 20 games to find out!

And all games on both laptops were  tested fresh a few days apart with  

the same game updates, same Windows 24H2  updates, latest BIOS, same GPU drivers,  

and the same CPU and GPU power limits  - so this is as fair as it gets.

Let’s start out with Cyberpunk 2077. I’ve got the  1080p results below and the 1440p results above,  

with Intel below AMD at each resolution.  The Intel CPU was 8% faster at 1080p,  

despite both laptops having the same 1%  low performance, and the fact that AMD  

was slightly ahead at 1440p. I double and triple  checked the results, and they were consistent.

I was very keen to test Red Dead Redemption 2,  

because I’ve found this game to perform  poorly on gaming laptops with Intel’s  

Meteor Lake processors. I’m not sure  why, but that was indeed the case here,  

with AMD seeing its biggest win out of all 20  games tested, coming in 10% faster at 1440p.

The Rift Breaker was 5% slower with AMD at 1080p,  

and AMD was a little slower at 1440p too,  but the CPU difference usually matters  

less at higher resolutions as we get more GPU  bound and the processor starts to matter less.

Baldur’s Gate 3 on the other  hand was a clear win for AMD,  

reaching a 7% higher average  FPS at both resolutions.

Civilization 6 measures turn time instead of FPS,  

so lower numbers are better here. AMD was slightly  faster at 1440p, but there’s no major difference.

Black Myth Wukong was a little weird. The  average FPS was very close at both resolutions,  

but we had less stuttering with AMD, which is why  its 1% lows were higher than Intel. Now this is  

a brand new game, so it’s entirely possible that  some upcoming update may change and improve this,  

but at the time of testing it was  running smoother on the AMD laptop.

Counter-Strike 2 was a little faster with Intel,  but the difference really isn’t much. Sure,  

if you’re playing competitively  you want every frame you can get,  

but at the same time, if you’re playing  competitively you’re probably looking at  

more powerful processors than these  ones designed for thinner laptops.

Spider-Man had a bigger lead with  the AMD laptop in most cases,  

while Microsoft’s flight simulator was  a bit faster with Intel. But then other  

games like Fortnite saw basically no real  difference between the two processors.

Alright, rather than waste your time individually  talking through the rest of the 10 games tested,  

I’m just going to quickly skip through the  results. Feel free to pause the video if you  

want a closer look at any of the games tested. It  takes a long time to test so many extra titles,  

but I think it’s important to use a wide  selection of games so we can get an accurate  

picture of the average performance differences  to make a fairer conclusion. Like I always say,  

more data equals more better. Let’s  look at those average differences next.

There’s no real difference on average when we  consider all 20 games tested at 1080p. In the most  

extreme cases, AMD and Intel both had one game  with an 8% difference. But once we factor in all  

20 games, AMD was just 0.35% faster on average,  which is basically nothing. It doesn’t matter.

Interestingly the gap widens a little  in favor of AMD at 1440p. It’s not much,  

AMD was only 1.6% faster on average here, but it’s  still a bit weird because normally the processor  

matters less at higher resolutions,  as we get more GPU bound. Regardless,  

at the end of the day, in most  games AMD isn’t that far ahead.

Here’s how frame rates look if we instead  take the average of all games at all  

resolutions. We’ve got 19 games rather  than 20 because we’re talking FPS here,  

so I can’t include Civ 6 like before. Anyway,  I think this better allows us to visually see  

the overall difference in a quick and  easy summary, and just like I’ve been  

talking about, on average there’s no major  difference at all between these processors.

Intel has a subtle edge when it comes to  total system latency, which is how long  

it takes between clicking the mouse and a gun  shot firing in counter strike 2. But again,  

the difference is extremely small and within  the margin of error range. Ultimately both  

processors are responsive when  it comes to competitive gaming.

But it’s a different story when running  a game only on the integrated graphics.  

AMD’s integrated graphics were 70% faster  in Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080p high settings.  

It’s actually usable with AMD at just under  60 FPS, while Intel was left in the dust.  

AMD was ahead in Shadow of the Tomb Raider too,  though with a smaller 33% FPS boost over Intel,  

but that’s still a much bigger difference  than we saw when using the RTX 4070 graphics.

So if you’re considering these processors  in a smaller and thinner laptop that does  

not have powerful discrete graphics  and you still want to do some gaming,  

then the AMD option is going  to perform a lot better.

But what about the price difference? Pricing  and availability will change over time,  

so check the links below the video for  updates and current sales. And if gaming  

laptops with either of these processors do  go on sale, we’ll be sure to add them to  

our gaminglaptop.deals website. We update that  every day to include all of the latest sales,  

so make sure that you check it out with that link  below to save money on your next gaming laptop.

At the time of recording, the AMD version of  ASUS’s Zephyrus G16 with RTX 4070 graphics  

goes for $2300 USD. While the older Intel  version with half the RAM goes for $2000.  

Unfortunately the Intel version in  the US only has 16 gigs of memory,  

unlike the one I tested which  has 32 to match the AMD laptop.

So although my comparison here was fair as  both of these laptops have 32 gigs of RAM,  

if you’re in the US the Intel  version is only available with 16,  

unless you step up to the more powerful RTX  4080 graphics. So that’s worth factoring  

in when considering that AMD costs $300  more, it does also have double the RAM.

The Intel laptop costs less at full price,  

but with some of the previous sales  we’ve had on the gaminglaptop.deals site,  

it’s been far far cheaper. The AMD model on  the other hand hasn’t seen any sales just yet,  

because it only just came out, whereas the Intel  model has been out for around 8 months now.

Intel is able to offer better value from a  cost per frame perspective, even if we don’t  

include its best case $1400 sale, which makes  it even better value compared to the AMD model.  

Basically because the FPS in games was about the  same once we take the average of all our games,  

whichever laptop is cheaper would win in  terms of value, and right now that’s Intel.

Outside of gaming, Intel was also offering  better value in terms of Cinebench 2024  

multicore score. Yeah, AMD was performing  11-12% faster than Intel in this workload,  

but at a minimum it also costs 15% more  money without a sale, so it’s slightly  

worse value in that regard. At least until we  start seeing some discounts on the AMD model.

Honestly, in terms of gaming performance,  it doesn’t seem to matter whether you go  

Intel or AMD between these two processors.  You could just get whichever is cheaper and  

have a great time playing. That said, some  games do have a clear bias for Intel while  

others have a clear bias for AMD. So maybe  if you’re playing one of those games that  

did significantly better on one or the other  then it might make sense to prioritize that.  

But once we average a bunch of games together  the difference between both is very minor.

The real reason to consider the AMD chip  instead of Intel are the better battery life,  

and better performance in non-gaming workloads,  especially rendering tasks where Zen 5 had some  

big leads. Or if you need more powerful  integrated graphics, which will be more  

important in thinner and lighter laptops  that don’t have powerful discrete graphics.  

And AMD was especially good at lower power levels  compared to Intel, so again another good reason to  

pick AMD if you’re going for one of those thinner  laptops that will have a lower power limit.

So yeah, overall AMD is better, which  isn’t too surprising considering their  

Zen 5 architecture came out almost  a year after Intel’s Meteor Lake.

Intel’s newer Lunar Lake was just announced,  which I thought was meant to replace Meteor  

Lake. But it maxes out with just  4P cores, 4E cores, and 8 threads,  

so I don’t think it’s going to be competitive  if you’re after multicore performance.

But based on some early tests that I’ve seen, it’s  starting to look like Intel’s new Lunar Lake has  

higher single core performance and better  integrated graphics than AMD. But at least  

one large brand has told me that they don’t plan  on putting Lunar Lake CPUs into gaming laptops,  

and gaming laptops is primarily what  we cover on this channel. But yeah,  

if you are considering one of those smaller  and lighter laptops then you’ll definitely want  

to check Lunar Lake benchmarks once that’s  released and see how it compares with AMD.

Now there’s way more to consider when buying  a new laptop than just the CPU that’s inside  

of it. Take the ASUS Zephyrus G16 for example, I  think it’s a pretty great gaming laptop, but it  

does have some pretty major flaws that you need to  be aware of. So check out my full review over here  

next where I’ve tested absolutely everything  in-depth. I’ll see you over in that one!