AMD's Vega Graphics Are Coming To Gaming Laptops (tomshardware.com)

Paul Alcorn reporting for Tom's Hardware: AMD listed the Ryzen 7 2800H and the Ryzen 5 2600H on its website. These new processors bring the inherent goodness of the Raven Ridge architecture, found in the Ryzen 5 2400G and the Ryzen 3 2200G, to gaming notebooks. As such, these processors come with AMD's Zen compute cores paired with the Vega graphics architecture, and they are also AMD's first processors to support DDR4-3200 as a base specification. Both new models feature a similar design as their desktop counterparts, albeit with slightly redesigned in frequencies to adjust for the flimsy cooling in mobile form factors and battery life limitations. That's reflected in the processors' reduced 45W TDP (thermal design power), which is much lower than the 65W TDP found on the desktop parts. AMD does give vendors some wiggle room with a configurable TDP (cTDP) range that spans between 35W and 45W.

The Ryzen 7 2800H is analogous to the 2400G, but it comes with a 3.3 GHz base and 3.8 GHz boost clocks. The four-core, eight-thread CPU is complemented by Vega graphics with 11 CU (Compute Unit) clocked up to a max of 1,300 MHz, which is a nice boost over its desktop counterpart. The Ryzen 5 2600H is similar to the 2200G, but it's four cores are hyper-threaded, which is a big bonus. The Vega graphics come with 8 CUs and boost up to 1,100 MHz.

Comments

Silvergun comparing discrete with on-Cpu gfx?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't seriously be comparing discrete graphics with on-APU graphics speed 1:1, can you? You aren't this simple are you?

Re:The performance #'s I've seen have been OK

[drinkypoo]

The problem isn't that Vega isn't good, it's that nVidia's offerings are still better.

I'd rather have less performance and play older games than support nVidia's tomfoolery with review terms and other bollocks. If AMD has figured out how to write a video driver, and if they've finally started releasing enough information for there to be a good free driver in a timely fashion, then I for one would prefer an AMD solution. And now that I'm over fiddling and diddling my PC endlessly and just want it to work, I may even consider something with an APU.

(composed on a desktop system with a FX-8350 and dual GTX 950s)

FGLRX vs Opensource

[DrYak]

ATI has never really be all that great, given it eh linux support.

The Linux support of Radeons (back in ATI time) relying on the proprietary FGLRX driver : yes, it wasn't stellar.

The thing is, that was a long time ago.
Since then, AMD has massively invested into opensource development (lots of devs on their payroll).

Modern day opensource stack works very nicely, including latest bells and whistles (supports openGL 4.5, supports vulkan - actually two different drivers available, RADV written by mesa devs, and AMDVLK recently open-sourced by AMD devs).

(This comes as the result of giant re-writing efforts from AMD, where they basically rewrote their drivers from scratch, with the intent to make cross-platform drivers that share as much as possible code between (which includes Windows, Linux, but also the tons of various other custom platforms), and have the Linux portions fully opensourced, eventually. But because this meant that massive parts of this new efforts did got written by devs with less Linux experience than the previous wave of opensource efforts at AMD, that also meant that often the kernel code did need lots of polishing before reaching quality necessary to be accepted upstream : hence the long-drawn story behind DAL/DC, behind AMDKFD/ROCm/OpenCL, AMDVLK/XGL/PAL, etc.
Took some time, but it's totally worth it, both from the end-user point of view (great quality opensource code with corporate support) and AMD's point of view (lots of shared bits across their platforms means easier to develop and less efforts. Newer GPU gets much faster support) )

Using a rolling distro (e.g.: like openSUSE's Tumbleweed) to frequently get driver & kernel updates, is a good idea.