Hello! I am looking for a laptop with a powerful processor (I plan to do web development). I choose between these processors https://vsrank.com/en/intel-core-i7-7700hq-vs-inte... Is it worth overpaying for Intel Core i7-10750H?
I just bought a Ryzen 3 laptop with two cores and it does average computer stuff just fine and boots really fast. $279 for Ryzen 3, 8GB RAM and a 128GB SSD, cant beat it.
I have at my parents a desktop with a dinosaur AMD Athlon II X4 620; 6GB of RAM, SSD, and it boots Windows 10 in a bit more than a minute. In your case, I would really check the system, Windows instalation etc.....
It's all a gimmick. It can go that fast only that it also gets as hot as a desktop class CPU. Which means it never gets to use that boost clock for any practice purpose. Let alone boost 14nm struggles to sustain a constant 40watts even in a Thinkpad chassis. That too after replacing the thermal paste and adding copper pads to move the heat better between the cpu-gpu heatpipes. So best case these can only sustain 3.6ghz for my six core with undervolting. And I for once donot believe that Intel is struggling with 10nm, they are just squeezing 14nm profits as long as they can, fooling people with these 5.3 ghz gimicks
Citation plz? I'd like to believe that AMD is beating Intel 5:1 in the desktop space, but if you're going to sling numbers, it benefits your argument if you show the source.
To be fair, a higher max boost can make a difference in SOME situations. Given a theoretical infinite speed and a tiny cooling capacity, a CPU could complete all work instantly and never overheat because it would instantly return to rest.
So postulate a work item that might take a slower cpu 15 seconds at full boost, which then overheats at 10 seconds and throttles down to 50% speed, dragging out the total time to 20 seconds. If the CPU was 30% faster, it could complete the work item within 10 seconds without overheating. 10 secs vs 20 secs, a doubling in perceived speed with only a 30% increase in CPU speed.
Practically speaking, it makes more of a difference for users who's work hovers on that margin of very short very intense use - launching 10 apps at a time, regular autosaving of complex work, switching between heavy duty apps, momentary high demand within apps or browsers etc.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
157 Comments
View All Comments
Andriivas - Sunday, November 22, 2020 - link
Hello! I am looking for a laptop with a powerful processor (I plan to do web development). I choose between these processors https://vsrank.com/en/intel-core-i7-7700hq-vs-inte... Is it worth overpaying for Intel Core i7-10750H?29a - Friday, April 3, 2020 - link
I just bought a Ryzen 3 laptop with two cores and it does average computer stuff just fine and boots really fast. $279 for Ryzen 3, 8GB RAM and a 128GB SSD, cant beat it.speedyxvn - Tuesday, April 14, 2020 - link
I have at my parents a desktop with a dinosaur AMD Athlon II X4 620; 6GB of RAM, SSD, and it boots Windows 10 in a bit more than a minute. In your case, I would really check the system, Windows instalation etc.....sharath.naik - Thursday, April 2, 2020 - link
It's all a gimmick. It can go that fast only that it also gets as hot as a desktop class CPU. Which means it never gets to use that boost clock for any practice purpose. Let alone boost 14nm struggles to sustain a constant 40watts even in a Thinkpad chassis. That too after replacing the thermal paste and adding copper pads to move the heat better between the cpu-gpu heatpipes. So best case these can only sustain 3.6ghz for my six core with undervolting. And I for once donot believe that Intel is struggling with 10nm, they are just squeezing 14nm profits as long as they can, fooling people with these 5.3 ghz gimickss.yu - Friday, April 3, 2020 - link
Really? AMD is outselling Intel 5:1 in the desktop space, you'd think that if they've got any tricks up their sleeves they'd have pulled them by now.Namisecond - Saturday, April 4, 2020 - link
Citation plz? I'd like to believe that AMD is beating Intel 5:1 in the desktop space, but if you're going to sling numbers, it benefits your argument if you show the source.s.yu - Monday, April 6, 2020 - link
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Ryzen-5-3600-and-Ryz...This is about 5:1, and unless the data from this particular retailer is somehow severely skewed in AMD's favor, this is the state of the market.
senttoschool - Thursday, April 2, 2020 - link
So literally the exact same CPUs as the last generation but only upped the max Turbo boost which could never be achieved with any normal laptop.Tomatotech - Thursday, April 2, 2020 - link
To be fair, a higher max boost can make a difference in SOME situations. Given a theoretical infinite speed and a tiny cooling capacity, a CPU could complete all work instantly and never overheat because it would instantly return to rest.So postulate a work item that might take a slower cpu 15 seconds at full boost, which then overheats at 10 seconds and throttles down to 50% speed, dragging out the total time to 20 seconds. If the CPU was 30% faster, it could complete the work item within 10 seconds without overheating. 10 secs vs 20 secs, a doubling in perceived speed with only a 30% increase in CPU speed.
Practically speaking, it makes more of a difference for users who's work hovers on that margin of very short very intense use - launching 10 apps at a time, regular autosaving of complex work, switching between heavy duty apps, momentary high demand within apps or browsers etc.
supdawgwtfd - Thursday, April 2, 2020 - link
That extra 30% performance isn't free...It increases heat output by more than the performance gained...
So your example is flawed.