Overclock.net banner

[Hot Hardware] First Hybrid Intel-AMD Chip Benchmarks With Dell XPS 15 Show Vega M Obliterating Intel UMD And MX 150 Graphics

5K views 38 replies 23 participants last post by  inedenimadam 
#1 ·


Earlier this year at CES 2018, Dell introduced its new XPS 15 2-in-1 machine, which it considers to be the world's most powerful convertible. In this case, all of the computing muscle is coming from Intel's new 8th generation Core i5 and Core i7 processors that feature on-package AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL GPUs with 4GB of HBM2.
While we previously gave you a hands-on look at the XPS 15 2-in-1 at the Dell booth, what we have today is even more tantalizing. We've got some results from multiple Rise of the Tomb Raider benchmark runs. The XPS 15 2-in-1 was configured with a Core i7-8705G processor (3.1GHz base, 4.1GHz boost), the aforementioned Radeon RX Vega M GL graphics processor, 16GB of DDR4 memory, and an ultra-fast NVMe SSD.

Running at 1920x1080 resolution, the XPS 15 2-in-1 was able to maintain an average frame rate of nearly 35 frames per second with High image quality settings dialed in. Compared to a similar 8th generation Core system with Intel's own integrated HD 620U graphics, it was no contest. Even on Medium Quality settings, the Intel HD 620 was only able to manage about 8 frames per second. In our video above, we're fairly certain the the 29 frames per second run on the XPS 15 2-in-1 was accomplished using the Very High IQ setting.

For comparison, an 8th generation Core processor paired with an NVIDIA MX 150 GPU was able to put up an average frame rate of around 23 frames per second in the same benchmark at High IQ settings.

Needless to say, graphics performance definitely looks promising for these new 8th generation Intel Core processors with AMD graphics. We don't know how long this AMD partnership will last, but the bitter rivals should be commended for hitting it out of the park on the first try.

In addition to the brawny processor and GPU, we should also mention that the XPS 15 2-in-1 can be had with a 15.6-inch UltraSharp 4K UHD InfinityEdge display and up to a 1TB NVMe SSD. A 75 WHr battery gives you up to 15 hours of runtime and everything is wrapped up in a stylish CNC-machined aluminum chassis.

The XPS 15 2-in-1 will begin shipping in late Spring with a starting price of $1,299.



https://hothardware.com/news/intel-core-i7-8705g-benchmarks-dell-xps-15-vega-m-umd-mx-150

Looks good.
 
See less See more
#5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

https://hothardware.com/reviews/intel-8th-gen-kaby-lake-refresh-mobile-review

They compared it against a low end ultrabook which was $719 acer swiftbook 3 with an i5 8250u and a low end mx150. That's 35-40watt platform vs $1500 65watt platform(1300 is basic spec). That's just poor sensationalistic journalism.
Well that is actually pretty good.
You pay 47% of the price to get 65% of the performance.
Cheers to the swift book 3. Much better price/performance and it should run for longer time.
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackCY View Post

It's always like that, they don't want to compare APUs vs a similarly priced product with a proper GPU on it.
Exactly. I seriously want to see AMD produce a mobile GPU again that can compete for a change. I don't want to compete with a 960M... I want it to compete with a 1060, and at least the Max-Q variant.
tongue.gif
 
#7 ·
my favorite thing about this is you cant swap out the memory or the wireless card if you wish because dell made the notebook 3.5mm thinner. lets take something that will put out some heat and make it thinner!! genius!!. so so tired of the who has the thinnest electronic device trend that has been going on for many years. People like to blame Apple for things but when it comes to that i blame them completely when they started showing that commercial i believe it was the macbook air fitting in a packaging envelope.
Quote:
The XPS 15 chassis, which ranges from 9mm to 16mm thick, is 3.5mm thinner than the previous-gen model, so Dell had to make some trade-offs. For instance, this model doesn't have SODIMMs. Instead, Dell solders up to 32GB of RAM on the motherboard. Dell also integrated the Killer wireless card into the motherboard. You can still swap out the battery and the SSD.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/dell-xps-15-cooling-intel-kaby-lake-g-vega-amd,36334.html
 
#38 ·
my favorite thing about this is you cant swap out the memory or the wireless card if you wish because dell made the notebook 3.5mm thinner. lets take something that will put out some heat and make it thinner!! genius!!. so so tired of the who has the thinnest electronic device trend that has been going on for many years. People like to blame Apple for things but when it comes to that i blame them completely when they started showing that commercial i believe it was the macbook air fitting in a packaging envelope.
Quote:The XPS 15 chassis, which ranges from 9mm to 16mm thick, is 3.5mm thinner than the previous-gen model, so Dell had to make some trade-offs. For instance, this model doesn't have SODIMMs. Instead, Dell solders up to 32GB of RAM on the motherboard. Dell also integrated the Killer wireless card into the motherboard. You can still swap out the battery and the SSD.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/dell-xps-15-cooling-intel-kaby-lake-g-vega-amd,36334.html
If laptops were any thinner they'd be two dimensional.
 
#8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

Well that is actually pretty good.
You pay 47% of the price to get 65% of the performance.
Cheers to the swift book 3. Much better price/performance and it should run for longer time.
One was running Very High and the other was running High.

Plus would you rather buy this:

https://static.acer.com/up/Resource/Acer/Laptops/Swift_3/Swift_3_2017/photo_gallery/20170414/Swift-3_gallery_02.png


Or this:

https://techaeris.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Dell-XPS-15-2-in-1.jpg


The carbon body and the display assembly of the XPS already cost as much as the entire Swift, I'd wager.
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artikbot View Post

One was running Very High and the other was running High.

Plus would you rather buy this:

Swift-3_gallery_02.png

Or this:

Dell-XPS-15-2-in-1.jpg


The carbon body and the display assembly of the XPS already cost as much as the entire Swift, I'd wager.
pffff, unfair comparison, make those pictures the same size, I always choose bigger.
tongue.gif


LOL it sized them similarly in the quote hahahah
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

pffff, unfair comparison, make those pictures the same size, I always choose bigger.
tongue.gif


LOL it sized them similarly in the quote hahahah
I did think of that myself... Unfortunately even Acer themselves don't have bigger pictures (that's pulled from their site).

Acer has always been rubbish at marketing.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artikbot View Post

One was running Very High and the other was running High.

Plus would you rather buy this:

Swift-3_gallery_02.png

Or this:

Dell-XPS-15-2-in-1.jpg


The carbon body and the display assembly of the XPS already cost as much as the entire Swift, I'd wager.
They are both running high. When the Intel AMD hybrid is running very high, it's FPS is 29.69. So his original numbers are appropriate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

...you prefer slower graphics?
And this is why we can't trust Intel's numbers.

In this game, the gtx 1050 is faster when compared with a system more fairly spec'ed against this one.



Considering the size and weight of the older XPS is almost the same volume, can be lighter or heavier depending on the battery size. This is a pretty fair comparison. We cannot trust Intel's number because if you look at the system specs, they already fudged them number using hardware(Single channel ddr, regular HD, old processors/videocards).

For reference, here is the very high performance numbers of the XPS 15 for rise of the tomb raider.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-XPS-15-9560-i7-7700HQ-UHD-Laptop-Review.200648.0.html

32.9 FPS.

One more thing to add is in the same game, the gtx 1060 max q, gets 65.6 FPS at high settings. That's 88% faster than Vega M GL in this game.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Nvidia-GTX-1060-Max-Q-Gaming-Performance-almost-on-par-with-GTX-1060.235896.0.html

Considering the tflop difference is going to be max 42% between GL and GH(probably less given the high boost clocks range for GH), I suspect this Vega GH to at best tie the max Q in the most favorable AMD game. But generally it will be about 20% slower. The gtx 1060 Max q tlops are basically the same as Vega GH, but given that Nvidia performance/tflop advantage over AMD, it will be almost impossible for Vega to be trading blows consistently.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultracarpet View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a nickname View Post

GTX 1050 is faster?
Ahh, i guess maybe in this laptop it is, but the NUC version of this chip Intel was expecting it to be trading blows with the 1060 max q according to linus's video.
The 100w one was, this is the 65w version.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

Well that is actually pretty good.
You pay 47% of the price to get 65% of the performance.
Cheers to the swift book 3. Much better price/performance and it should run for longer time.
Or you can get one of these

https://www.geekbuying.com/item/Mi-Notebook-Pro-Fingerprints-15-6-256GB-Space-Gray-385791.html

or

https://www.gearbest.com/laptops/pp_648196.html?wid=4

The Acer is a cheap POS, like most of their devices.

I the dell listed above at least is solid.

But consider the two laptops I just listed are made by a huge Chinese manufacture with a large market share in the phone business. Quality is quite good...

Also the mx150 is pretty slow compared to the AMD intel is using. Which is up in the 1050 performance range.
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

https://hothardware.com/reviews/intel-8th-gen-kaby-lake-refresh-mobile-review

They compared it against a low end ultrabook which was $719 acer swiftbook 3 with an i5 8250u and a low end mx150. That's 35-40watt platform vs $1500 65watt platform(1300 is basic spec). That's just poor sensationalistic journalism.
Then do the homework and compare it against the fastest integrated chip there is that's not AMD. You can't... The APU is a beast for a reason: It's microscopic (sitting side by side with the CPU) and uses very little power.

This allows for far more versatility than any dedicated laptop could ever provide.
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by assaulth3ro911 View Post

This allows for far more versatility than any dedicated laptop could ever provide.
I don't agree.

A CPU with an iGPU and dGPU, is a much better versatile machine.
You get the low power good enough iGPU for browsing, working, and it will last for hours and generate very little heat. And you have the beast dGPU that will make all the performance increase when you need it to.

That is a lot more versatile than a 65w package that is stuck in the middle. It doesn't have the power of the dGPU, nor the low power and stamina of the iGPU. It is trying to do both, not that successful.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

It doesn't have the power of the dGPU, nor the low power and stamina of the iGPU.
The former depends on the dGPU you compare it to, but it's definitely got the latter. These packages still have fully functional Intel IGPs.
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

I don't agree.

A CPU with an iGPU and dGPU, is a much better versatile machine.
You get the low power good enough iGPU for browsing, working, and it will last for hours and generate very little heat. And you have the beast dGPU that will make all the performance increase when you need it to.

That is a lot more versatile than a 65w package that is stuck in the middle. It doesn't have the power of the dGPU, nor the low power and stamina of the iGPU. It is trying to do both, not that successful.
This chip is a CPU with a iGPU and a gGPU, just on a single package. The Only difference is the system has a higher TDP for less throttling at max, as Intel CPU's can pull a good amount of wattage at full bore. The GPU they chose and are using is already neck and neck with Nividia in terms of Performance/watt....

The Intel/AMD Driver setup just for this chip probably is going to need some fine tuning before its launch, it terms of power saving. But with a higher TDP you can bet that you are not going to get the throttling on the CPU and GPU that you would get from some of those Intel Laptops with 1050 graphics.

Also remember that just because something has a higher TDP, doesn't mean you are using more power when browsing the web or doing other simple tasks. What it really means is you are able to get more out of the device at full load.... Something I am totally for, especially with a product like this.
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

I don't agree.

A CPU with an iGPU and dGPU, is a much better versatile machine.
You get the low power good enough iGPU for browsing, working, and it will last for hours and generate very little heat. And you have the beast dGPU that will make all the performance increase when you need it to.

That is a lot more versatile than a 65w package that is stuck in the middle. It doesn't have the power of the dGPU, nor the low power and stamina of the iGPU. It is trying to do both, not that successful.
So I see what you're saying but I also disagree. This GPU burns slightly more power but for a balance between the two, it does more.

I am a power user, I use all components of my devices to their fullest extents, I own an Acer Switch Alpha so I will have a thing or two to say on the subject. I've run ArcheAge for an entire day to be specific. That's running on an Intel iGPU. The Switch Alpha is tiny and liquid cooled (closed loop), it's revolutionary if you ask me because it gets zero dust degradation (the destroyer of all mobile devices other than battery degradation.)

I would buy a device with this AMD in it over the one with the iGPU. I would avoid the dGPU where possible to avoid more power burn and larger footprint when trying to use it casually, perhaps for movie watching.

In the end, this device being the best of both worlds is superior, not inferior. I would need to do extensive testing myself and of course view more products that are made with the combo, but I can say with my opinion that this system is a good one.

However, I will likely be avoiding it anyway as Intel was DOA for me even before Specter due to extensively poor business practices. Therefore, I would hope to see something like the Switch Alpha released with a Ryzen combo, but I won't be upgrading for another year, so I don't care right now.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by assaulth3ro911 View Post

So I see what you're saying but I also disagree. This GPU burns slightly more power but for a balance between the two, it does more.

I am a power user, I use all components of my devices to their fullest extents, I own an Acer Switch Alpha so I will have a thing or two to say on the subject. I've run ArcheAge for an entire day to be specific. That's running on an Intel iGPU. The Switch Alpha is tiny and liquid cooled (closed loop), it's revolutionary if you ask me because it gets zero dust degradation (the destroyer of all mobile devices other than battery degradation.)

I would buy a device with this AMD in it over the one with the iGPU. I would avoid the dGPU where possible to avoid more power burn and larger footprint when trying to use it casually, perhaps for movie watching.

In the end, this device being the best of both worlds is superior, not inferior. I would need to do extensive testing myself and of course view more products that are made with the combo, but I can say with my opinion that this system is a good one.

However, I will likely be avoiding it anyway as Intel was DOA for me even before Specter due to extensively poor business practices. Therefore, I would hope to see something like the Switch Alpha released with a Ryzen combo, but I won't be upgrading for another year, so I don't care right now.
They didn't remove the iGPU from the CPU....

the iGPU is still there....

This is nothing more than a custom package, designed to save space.....
The AMD GPU is a dGPU, and the iGPU is still Intel's...

I think people are just whining because they did use a Nvidia GPU
doh.gif
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by DzillaXx View Post

They didn't remove the iGPU from the CPU....

the iGPU is still there....

This is nothing more than a custom package, designed to save space.....
The AMD GPU is a dGPU, and the iGPU is still Intel's...

I think people are just whining because they did use a Nvidia GPU
doh.gif
Intel would rather die work with AMD, than work with NVidia...
tongue.gif
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top