Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, djinni999 said:

The G is APU, so he won't need a GPU, which he really doesn't for FM anyway, so yeah, that's a very good choice. But how much is the 3300X? 120 quid? Plus a GPU, so if it's purely FM and nothing else for years, then yeah go with that. I don't know the ST performance of that CPU though, so it may or may not be a sweetspot. let me check

EDIT: 3300X is 21% faster for single-thread. So it may be worth it to shell out slightly more. Plus, 3300X will benefit fully from RAM OC/tweaking, which no other Ryzen will. 

Definitely something to think about but his budget is pretty tight and he’s not very tech savvy so he’d be unlikely to appreciate the difference. It’s gonna be like night and day compared to his current second gen i5 laptop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Brother Ben said:

Definitely something to think about but his budget is pretty tight and he’s not very tech savvy so he’d be unlikely to appreciate the difference. It’s gonna be like night and day compared to his current second gen i5 laptop

Yeah. Even my i2500K was just fine not really bad at all the last time I was playing FM. Even in a poorly optimized game like SCUM it was just fine. At least give him some upgradability options, ie motherboard. The B450 is the budget chipset to go for. He'll enjoy the option of upgrading to 3rd Gen if he pleases, 2 or 3 years down the line. It'll be less confusing than an Intel build. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, djinni999 said:

Yeah. Even my i2500K was just fine not really bad at all the last time I was playing FM. Even in a poorly optimized game like SCUM it was just fine. At least give him some upgradability options, ie motherboard. The B450 is the budget chipset to go for. He'll enjoy the option of upgrading to 3rd Gen if he pleases, 2 or 3 years down the line. It'll be less confusing than an Intel build. 

will do, cheers for the advice.  No doubt it'll be me doing the upgrading though.

I've been thinking about next years benchmarks and I think its gonna be a bit different next year, I kept them the same as previous editions mainly to give comparison but its almost impossible to recreate the same conditions so I may well have a complete rethink.  I'll keep the all leagues all players benchmark as its the bread and butter of this sort of thing and lets the guys with the mighty hardware flex their muscles but i'm going to have a long hard think about the other benchmarks

I keep wondering if maybe SI could help out with this and whether they know what the most common amount of leagues/nations player count etc is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

will do, cheers for the advice.  No doubt it'll be me doing the upgrading though.

I've been thinking about next years benchmarks and I think its gonna be a bit different next year, I kept them the same as previous editions mainly to give comparison but its almost impossible to recreate the same conditions so I may well have a complete rethink.  I'll keep the all leagues all players benchmark as its the bread and butter of this sort of thing and lets the guys with the mighty hardware flex their muscles but i'm going to have a long hard think about the other benchmarks

I keep wondering if maybe SI could help out with this and whether they know what the most common amount of leagues/nations player count etc is

Why do you believe that it is so hard to recreate the conditions? I never really understood this. After all, it's just a certain amount of data and the processing. I mean, added features, like I don't know, social media, press conferences, media etc. might adversely affect processing time, but the database and game setup should work the same way, maybe?

As we talked about earlier, if you're looking for a meaningful comparison of different FM versions, all you need to do is choose the right dates. So it starts in the same period of a season, say CL first week matches, and then the normal over the weekend matches for the leagues. So, the same type and same amount of matches are played and calculated by the same method over a long enough time to reduce standard deviation and give statistically significant results. 

AS for the most common setups, maybe a sticky ongoing poll in the main forum would help. I generally pick 1 active nation, the remaining big 4 top 2 tiers view only for both players and increased transfer activity. Maybe internationals, and top clubs, etc. as well. Don't remember the player count I had in my last saves. Maybe 80K or so.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, djinni999 said:

Why do you believe that it is so hard to recreate the conditions? I never really understood this. After all, it's just a certain amount of data and the processing. I mean, added features, like I don't know, social media, press conferences, media etc. might adversely affect processing time, but the database and game setup should work the same way, maybe?

As we talked about earlier, if you're looking for a meaningful comparison of different FM versions, all you need to do is choose the right dates. So it starts in the same period of a season, say CL first week matches, and then the normal over the weekend matches for the leagues. So, the same type and same amount of matches are played and calculated by the same method over a long enough time to reduce standard deviation and give statistically significant results. 

AS for the most common setups, maybe a sticky ongoing poll in the main forum would help. I generally pick 1 active nation, the remaining big 4 top 2 tiers view only for both players and increased transfer activity. Maybe internationals, and top clubs, etc. as well. Don't remember the player count I had in my last saves. Maybe 80K or so.  

I think the major issue this time around was that unbeknownst to me the English transfer window had moved this season so that would definitely have had an effect especially as Watford are used for the test.  Most people on this thread tend to gauge their results against other systems and not other game versions in my experience.

Like I said though its very much a work in progress although I am liking the idea of a bear minimum test as a mirror to the "maximum everything" test i'd like to know if there is a point where there's so little to process that it doesn't really matter what processor you have.  You can still play the game albeit at bare minimum.  The bare minimum in this case would be probably just the premier league with a small database.

There is a How many nations do you usually load? thread but it doesn't really allude to how many leagues people run which is the big processor drain

Maybe a Poll with multiple questions

  1. How many active Nations do you use?
  2. How many active leagues do you run?
  3. What size database do you use?
  4. How many active leagues do you run in full detail?

Food for thought anyway

Edited by Brother Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Brother Ben said:

I think the major issue this time around was that unbeknownst to me the English transfer window had moved this season so that would definitely have had an effect especially as Watford are used for the test.  Most people on this thread tend to gauge their results against other systems and not other game versions in my experience.

Like I said though its very much a work in progress although I am liking the idea of a bear minimum test as a mirror to the "maximum everything" test i'd like to know if there is a point where there's so little to process that it doesn't really matter what processor you have.  You can still play the game albeit at bare minimum.  The bare minimum in this case would be probably just the premier league with a small database.

There is a How many nations do you usually load? thread but it doesn't really allude to how many leagues people run which is the big processor drain

Food for thought anyway

Oh I see. That makes sense and will affect processing time. Of course, it shouldn't matter for a CPU bench as it's the same save file everyone is going to use. But it will skew the results when comparing to previous versions. But comparing different versions isn't really meaningful, except to satisfy curiosity maybe and to gauge improvements in efficiency over the years. At the end of the day, how many people are going to play a particularly fast old version? I know there are legendary versions that people just love, and data update activity is pretty high. I myself have CM 00/01 installed right now, It was to test some things and also it is clutter free very responsive and you can breeze through it. Most will play the latest or the one before that, just in order to not abandon a save they invested in. 

One tip. Make a standard benchmark that takes place outside transfer windows. Since youth intake also significantly slow things down, especially the big nations, you'd want to avoid that period too. It's not just the slowing down, you just want to minimize variance. So, very early February after the window has surely closed to mid-February, when there won't be any intake from the Big 5 would make a good candidate. And retroactively, the same saves can be created for earlier versions, as long as people are willing to bother with it and players are willing to participate in the benchmarks.

Edit: Not allowing matches to be rescheduled for TV broadcast would also be needed.

Edited by djinni999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

"Fun-fact"  this is the first desktop in 15 years I didnt build myself.

Type: Desktop

Model: Komplett Premium Gaming A175 (powered by asus)

CPU Model: Ryzen 7 3700X

CPU Base Frequency: 3.6GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.4 GHz

RAM: 32GB

RAM Clockspeed: 2666Mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 2070 DUAL OC - 8GB

Storage Type: 500GB NvME 3D NAND PCIE-x4 (SSD)

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 5 sec

Benchmark B: 7 min 24 sec

Benchmark C: 6 min 17 sec

Edited by Djuicer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/06/2020 at 00:00, djinni999 said:

Also, don't use two hardware monitors at the same time. They will interfere with eachother. And with most monitors you have an 'observer's effect'; while monitoring the software is stimulating your CPU and skewing the results. Use Ryzen Master for temps and CPU clocks, etc to get the most precise measurements.

Yeah I read that and I am stuck with Asus Armoury Crate app for that, and I think it is always running, as it control fans and power profiles. 

 

And for the benchmark adjustment for next iterations, I would like to add, for myself, mostly I don't spend that long waiting, mostly I stop nearly everyday, but some cases it goes 3-4 days or more during international calls and off-season. The problem, if I said people needs to describe how is their overall gaming experience, it will be based on opinions (and their degree of considering something lagging, stuttering, or smooth). A behavior that I was facing with old laptop, when I change tabs, it lags a little, and it is not smooth, when I go to scouting for example, it take a lot of time to load players list, although I use small database -but load many leagues as view only-, where I tried the new laptop with more active leagues and medium database, and it is a lot faster in loading lists. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 19/06/2020 at 11:19, Brother Ben said:

We just need one of these fabled 4th gen mobile Ryzens as a comparison.  

I am able to help here...

Type: Laptop

Model: Asus TUF 15

CPU Model: Ryzen 9 4900H

CPU Base Frequency: 3.3GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.4GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3200mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX2060 - 6GB

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A:  1 min 15

Benchmark B:  8 min 16

Benchmark C:  6 min 53

Edited by LincolnCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, LincolnCanary said:

I am able to help here...

Type: Laptop

Model: Asus TUF 15

CPU Model: Ryzen 9 4900H

CPU Base Frequency: 3.3GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.4GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3200mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX2060 - 6GB

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A:  1 min 15

Benchmark B:  8 min 16

Benchmark C:  6 min 53

Our first Ryzen mobile on the benchmark, what kind of thermals did you get?

thanks for doing the test, hard to make comparisons with no other samples but it seems AMD have really upped their game, this chip only lags behind the intel HK's which have higher clock speeds and an even more premium price

we could do with a few Ryzen 5 & 7 4th series benchmarks really to get a better idea of how the range compares

i'll update the comparison chart ASAP

Edited by Brother Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/06/2020 at 20:33, Brother Ben said:

Cheers Simon.

New laptop arrived yet?

Well it’s finally here!

I’ll get it set up and will get the tests done at some point over the weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Our first Ryzen mobile on the benchmark, what kind of thermals did you get?

I didn't measure it, but it's definitely a laptop that will stop me needing to put my heating on!

It runs FM superbly though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, simonstocker14 said:

Well it’s finally here!

I’ll get it set up and will get the tests done at some point over the weekend.

Nice one, i'll hold off on updating the latest results until i've got yours in. :thup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So i7 8700k CPU is King when come to FM 2020?  I thought  Ryzen 3950X CPU was the king due so many Cores?

I am guessing that Football Manager used Single Threads of the Speed of CPU hence why Intel CPU better due faster on Single Cores.......Am I right ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rookie FM said:

So i7 8700k CPU is King when come to FM 2020?  I thought  Ryzen 3950X CPU was the king due so many Cores?

I am guessing that Football Manager used Single Threads of the Speed of CPU hence why Intel CPU better due faster on Single Cores.......Am I right ?

An incredibly well overclocked i7 8700k Is king on Benchmark A yes

Your second paragraph is oversimplified but to all intents and purposes yes

Although a 7 year old amd fx-9590 Can hit 5GHz but I seriously doubt it would trouble any of the modern processors on the list

Ryzens do well on benchmark C which seems to do well with more cores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

An incredibly well overclocked i7 8700k Is king on Benchmark A yes

Your second paragraph is oversimplified but to all intents and purposes yes

Although a 7 year old amd fx-9590 Can hit 5GHz but I seriously doubt it would trouble any of the modern processors on the list

Ryzens do well on benchmark C which seems to do well with more cores

The ipc of the amd fx-9590 even at 5ghz is terrible and would not touch no modern cpu from intel or amd and football manager relies so much on single core performance and only utilises all cores when the detail level is on all

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jckc221013jamie said:

The ipc of the amd fx-9590 even at 5ghz is terrible and would not touch no modern cpu from intel or amd and football manager relies so much on single core performance and only utilises all cores when the detail level is on all

 
  •  

Correct, exactly my point

Edited by Brother Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Nice one, i'll hold off on updating the latest results until i've got yours in. :thup:

Benchmark A: 1 min 20 Sec

Benchmark B: 10 min 05 Sec

Benchmark C: 9 min 17 Sec
 

Not a bad improvement!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, simonstocker14 said:

Benchmark A: 1 min 20 Sec

Benchmark B: 10 min 05 Sec

Benchmark C: 9 min 17 Sec
 

Not a bad improvement!!

Benchmark A: 3 times faster

Benchmark B: 2 1/2 times faster

Benchmark C: 5 times faster

Amazing improvement, definitely worth upgrading

edit - link to specs

Edited by Brother Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Post 2 updated with the latest results  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Type: Laptop

Model: Aspire 5 A15-44

CPU Model: Ryzen 7 4700U

CPU Base Frequency: 2GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4GHz

RAM: 8GB

RAM Clockspeed: 2396mhz

GPU: AMD Radeon RX Vega 7

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A:  1 min 19

Benchmark B:  10 min 4

Benchmark C:  9 min 11

Also ran Benchmark A on my old laptop (Intel Core i5-4210M), that came in at 2 min 6 so very happy with the improvement.

Shout out to the advice I received in the laptop recommendation thread. I was recommended to wait for a 4600U when I was looking for a laptop about a month ago, picked this up for £637 which feels like good value (don't say otherwise! :D).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, johnwalker said:

Type: Laptop

Model: Aspire 5 A15-44

CPU Model: Ryzen 7 4700U

CPU Base Frequency: 2GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4GHz

RAM: 8GB

RAM Clockspeed: 2396mhz

GPU: AMD Radeon RX Vega 7

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A:  1 min 19

Benchmark B:  10 min 4

Benchmark C:  9 min 11

Also ran Benchmark A on my old laptop (Intel Core i5-4210M), that came in at 2 min 6 so very happy with the improvement.

Shout out to the advice I received in the laptop recommendation thread. I was recommended to wait for a 4600U when I was looking for a laptop about a month ago, picked this up for £637 which feels like good value (don't say otherwise! :D).

Great value, was that the one with the student discount?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Great value, was that the one with the student discount?

Yeah it was, happy so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying it out on a different machine:

 

Type: Desktop

Model: Mac mini (2018)

CPU Model: i5 - 8500B

CPU Base Frequency: 3.0 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.1 GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 2666Mhz

GPU: Intel UHD Graphics 630 - 1536MB

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 00 Sec

Benchmark B: 7 min 43 Sec

Benchmark C: 7 min 36 Sec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, alcedo said:

Trying it out on a different machine:

 

Type: Desktop

Model: Mac mini (2018)

CPU Model: i5 - 8500B

CPU Base Frequency: 3.0 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.1 GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 2666Mhz

GPU: Intel UHD Graphics 630 - 1536MB

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 00 Sec

Benchmark B: 7 min 43 Sec

Benchmark C: 7 min 36 Sec

Thanks for this, good little performer. On benchmark A it's on par with an i7 9700k.  Impressive.

I'm conflicted as to where to put  this on the charts, I've put my own Inel NUC mini PC in the laptop catagory as it has a laptop "U" processor but this "B" suffix processor is to all intents and purposes a desktop chip (and performs as such) so i'll put it there.

Edited by Brother Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Thanks for this, good little performer. On benchmark A it's on par with an i7 9700k.  Impressive.

I'm conflicted as to where to put  this on the charts, I've put my own Inel NUC mini PC in the laptop catagory as it has a laptop "U" processor but this "B" suffix processor is to all intents and purposes a desktop chip (and performs as such) so i'll put it there.

Yeah, I’m pleasantly surprised tbh

Great work you’re doing with the spreadsheet btw – found it very helpful. Makes sense to group by processor type. Think the previous Mini used a laptop processor — that probably wasn’t as fun for FM

Edited by alcedo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Type: Laptop

Model: HP Pavilion 15 (ec1001na)

CPU Model: AMD Ryzen 5 4600H

CPU Base Frequency: 3 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4 GHz

RAM: 8GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3192Mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 - 4GB

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 17 Sec

Benchmark B: 9 min 08 Sec

Benchmark C: 8 min 07 Sec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it would be good to show how the new ryzen processors perform:

Type: Laptop

Model: Lenovo Ideapad 14 5

CPU Model: AMD Ryzen 7 4700u

CPU Base Frequency: 2.0 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.1 GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3200Mhz

GPU: Vega 7 (Integrated)

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 30 Sec

Benchmark B: 11 min 37 Sec

Benchmark C: 10 min 28 Sec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Type: Desktop

Model: Built on a X570 Aorus Ultra

CPU Model: AMD Ryzen 7 3800x

CPU Base Frequency: 3.9 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.4 GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3200MHz

GPU: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

Storage Type: M.2.

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 04Sec

Benchmark B: 7 min 15 Sec

Benchmark C: 5 min 58 Sec

 

quick question to those with 32GB of ram, is that dual channel 2x16GB or quad channel 4x8GB? And question to anyone who knows the answer which set up is better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Type: Desktop

Model: Self built - ASUS ROG STRIX B450-F MOBO

CPU Model: AMD Ryzen 5 3600

CPU Base Frequency: 3.6 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4.2 GHz

RAM: 32GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3200Mhz

GPU: Zotac GeForce RTX 2060

Storage Type: SSD

Benchmark A: 1 min 05 Sec

Benchmark B: 7 min 20 Sec

Benchmark C: 6 min 47 Sec

Finally got around to doing my benchmarks and I'm pretty happy with the results. My original plan was to start with a 3600 and then swap it out when I could (A) afford an upgrade and (B) sell it to my bro to use in the pc I'm gonna build for him. But looking at the benchmarks for some of the 'better' CPUs I had in mind it looks like there is no real benefit to justify the higher price.

On 27/07/2020 at 15:35, Malicious Penguin said:

Type: Laptop

Model: HP Pavilion 15 (ec1001na)

CPU Model: AMD Ryzen 5 4600H

CPU Base Frequency: 3 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4 GHz

RAM: 8GB

RAM Clockspeed: 3192Mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 - 4GB

Storage Type: SSD

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 17 Sec

Benchmark B: 9 min 08 Sec

Benchmark C: 8 min 07 Sec

I remember your posts in the laptop/ PC buyers thread so I'm glad to see this one gives you some pretty good benchmark results

6 hours ago, J-Hood said:

 

quick question to those with 32GB of ram, is that dual channel 2x16GB or quad channel 4x8GB? And question to anyone who knows the answer which set up is better?

 

I upgraded from 2x8GB to 4x8GB purely as an impulse buy after seeing the same Vengeance 3200Mhz RAM available at a bargain price. To be honest I haven't really noticed a massive improvement in the game and the performance tab never shows me using more than 35% of available memory but I guess it's always good to have more than you need. I think it has improved multitasking though as internet browsing and streaming youtube/ IPlayer on the second monitor whilst playing the game seems pretty smooth. But that could just be me wanting to think there's a difference to justify buying them :)

Edited by matt_forest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/07/2020 at 21:40, matt_forest said:

 

I upgraded from 2x8GB to 4x8GB purely as an impulse buy after seeing the same Vengeance 3200Mhz RAM available at a bargain price. To be honest I haven't really noticed a massive improvement in the game and the performance tab never shows me using more than 35% of available memory but I guess it's always good to have more than you need. I think it has improved multitasking though as internet browsing and streaming youtube/ IPlayer on the second monitor whilst playing the game seems pretty smooth. But that could just be me wanting to think there's a difference to justify buying them :)

Yeah I did the same thing, impulse buy of 2x8gb ram sticks to add to what I had but I checked the program used to see all the component details I noticed it said somewhere dual channel, so no wondering if I should've just up graded to 2x16gb ram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello I'm new here and wanted to ask if someone have a Laptop with AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750u and could posts the results? 

And the same with i7-9850H? 

I'm thinking about ThinkPad T14 with Ryzen 7 Pro 4750u or ThinkPad P53 with i7-9850H but not decided yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this forum still being updated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 15/08/2020 at 18:26, J-Hood said:

is this forum still being updated?

Yep, the spreadsheet is up to date but I need to put the pictures on the second post.  To be honest its better to click on the spreadsheet link because you can manipulate the data.

I'll be sorting the screenshots ASAP. 

This is very much still alive, i'm already planing the benchmarks for FM21.  The last thing I want to is for people to think this isn't still being monitored, we need all the benchmarks we can get!

Edited by Brother Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/08/2020 at 04:30, Color said:

Hello I'm new here and wanted to ask if someone have a Laptop with AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750u and could posts the results? 

And the same with i7-9850H? 

I'm thinking about ThinkPad T14 with Ryzen 7 Pro 4750u or ThinkPad P53 with i7-9850H but not decided yet. 

Not yet but I did a little digging and performance wise they look very similar.  With evenly matched systems like that you want to be keeping an eye out for thermals.  See if you can find reviews of the models you want.  FM can be very intensive and it will throttle down to the base clock if it overheats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Yep, the spreadsheet is up to date but I need to put the pictures on the second post.  To be honest its better to click on the spreadsheet link because you can manipulate the data.

I'll be sorting the screenshots ASAP. 

This is very much still alive, i'm already planing the benchmarks for FM21.  The last thing I want to is for people to think this isn't still being monitored, we need all the benchmarks we can get!

great, the benchmark i posted is redundant now as i upgraded to a AMD Ryzen 3950x and got 2 more sticks of ram to make it 32gb (so now have 8gbx4) would be nice if the spread sheet showed the RAM information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, J-Hood said:

great, the benchmark i posted is redundant now as i upgraded to a AMD Ryzen 3950x and got 2 more sticks of ram to make it 32gb (so now have 8gbx4) would be nice if the spread sheet showed the RAM information

Sorry mate not sure what you mean. Do you have new results to post? 
you can test the same system twice if you want 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brother Ben said:

Sorry mate not sure what you mean. Do you have new results to post? 
you can test the same system twice if you want 

I'll post new results when I test it, just pointing out I posted results and now have a new setup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, J-Hood said:

I'll post new results when I test it, just pointing out I posted results and now have a new setup

okay yeah that's great more the merrier :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worked out how to do a few charts, put them in the second post.  

Not really sure what to read into them though.

Anyone want anything in particular to go into a chart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Purchased a new laptop based on advise on new laptop thread.

Old

Type: Laptop

Model: MSI CX61

CPU Model: Intel i7 4702MQ

CPU Base Frequency: 2.2 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 3.2 GHz

RAM: 16GB

RAM Clockspeed: 1600Mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M

Storage Type: SSHD

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 58 Sec

Benchmark B: 13 min 26 Sec

Benchmark C: 14 min  55 Sec

 

New

Type: Laptop

Model: PC Specialist Build

CPU Model: AMD Ryzen 7 4800H

CPU Base Frequency: 2.9 GHz

CPU Turbo Frequency: 4 .2 GHz

RAM: 16 GB

RAM Clockspeed: 2660 Mhz

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060

Storage Type: SSD M.2

 

Benchmark A: 1 min 16 Sec

Benchmark B:  9 min 18 Sec

Benchmark C: 7 min  29 Sec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/08/2020 at 01:40, Brother Ben said:

Not yet but I did a little digging and performance wise they look very similar.  With evenly matched systems like that you want to be keeping an eye out for thermals.  See if you can find reviews of the models you want.  FM can be very intensive and it will throttle down to the base clock if it overheats

Thanks. When I'm looking on the benchmark list, than it seems that FM2020 use 8 cores. And the Ryzen Pro 4750u has also 8 real cores. 

Meanwhile I'm also looking for laptops with 8 cores Intel, especially i7-10875H.

 

I still use an old thinkpad T530 with dual core and play FM2020. 

Until now I didn't have notice any overheating. 

So I think that the ThinkPad T14 with Ryzen 7 Pro 4750u should work similarly regarding to throttling. Am I wrong? 

But anyway, I'm looking for a 17" Laptop now, because I don't want use an external monitor. 

 

Thanks for the results @crghurst

I also considered Ryzen Laptops with H processors. But unfortunately there aren't qualitativ 17" Laptops with Ryzen H processors for me. Perhaps XMG Core 17 or MSI Bravo 17 but the GPU isn't good enough for other games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@Color have you looked at PC Specialist , I think they have a custom build 17" with Ryzen H processors.

I was looking at the i7-10875h so would like to see a benchmark of one of them if anyone has one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, crghurst said:

 

@Color have you looked at PC Specialist , I think they have a custom build 17" with Ryzen H processors.

I was looking at the i7-10875h so would like to see a benchmark of one of them if anyone has one.

 

Thanks for the tip. I didn't know this website set. There are attractive prices. 

But I couldn't find a 17" laptop with Ryzen and RTX 2060/2070. Only with 15" Laptops. 

Edit: ah my mistake. There are 17" laptops with Ryzen 7 H processor indeed. 

Edited by Color

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/08/2020 at 11:47, Color said:

Thanks for the tip. I didn't know this website set. There are attractive prices. 

But I couldn't find a 17" laptop with Ryzen and RTX 2060/2070. Only with 15" Laptops. 

Edit: ah my mistake. There are 17" laptops with Ryzen 7 H processor indeed. 

Good website, I've ordered from them in the past.  Actually still run a system I got from them, it's a bit like Trigger's broom these days but was good at the time.

17 inch should give you better thermals anyway.  Depending on your budget you can actually get larger laptops like that with desktop processors in them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Brother Ben said:

Good website, I've ordered from them in the past.  Actually still run a system I got from them, it's a bit like Trigger's broom these days but was good at the time.

17 inch should give you better thermals anyway.  Depending on your budget you can actually get larger laptops like that with desktop processors in them

I haven't decided yet between Ryzen 7 H processor or i7-10875H. 

But I couldn't find any info about their laptops. Plastic or aluminum or magnesium alloy regarding to material of their laptops. Or how are the thermal values, temperature, fan volume while playing and while surfing. 

Unfortunately, a lot of information is missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it can be hard to find first hand experience when looking for a new laptop.  Maybe look for reviews first then work backwards?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...