Laptops powered by the new Intel 10th gen Comet Lake-H processors have now started to become available and we've been steadily receiving quite a few of them in our test labs. Previously, we have exclusively posted some first benchmarks of Comet Lake-H that we received from industry sources, which showed Intel continuing to have a small yet appreciable lead in single-core performance compared to AMD Ryzen 4000 H-series chips.
Now, we have managed to do some in-house testing of the Core i7-10875H powering the new Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB laptop. A full review of the new Aero 17 HDR XB will follow soon, but here are our first thoughts on how the Core i7-10875H stacks up when compared to 9th gen CPUs and the competition from AMD Renoir Ryzen 4000.
Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Wanted:
- Specialist News Writer
- Magazine Writer
- Translator (DE<->EN)
Details here
Core i7-10875H — Cinebench R15 and R20
Let's start off with the ever-popular Cinebench R15 and R20 tests. Compared to the average scores posted by the Core i9-9980HK and the Core i9-9880H, the Core i7-10875H in the Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB seems to have a 7% and 11% lead, respectively in the Cinebench R15 single-core benchmark. We see that the scores of the Aero 15 Studio XB and the Aero 17 HDR XB are nearly the same in the single-core bench and differ at best by 5% in multi-core indicating that the larger 17-inch chassis does not influence the performance much. We expect to do a Cinebench loop test in our full review of the laptop to see if the larger chassis can afford any benefits in sustained performance, so keep an eye out for that.
The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS powering the Asus Zephyrus G14 trails by 9% in CB15 single when compared to the Core i7-10875H but is either on par or slightly faster than the Core i9-9880H. This is a strong comeback by AMD in single-core performance, and coupled with perceivable leads in multi-core, it is an indication that gaming laptop segment is no longer an Intel-only dominion.
The Ryzen 9 4900HS leads the CB15 multi-core test next only to the Core i9-9900K. Here, we see that both the Ryzen 9 4900HS and the Ryzen 7 4800H show 11% and 10% leads, respectively over the Core i7-10875H. This is a fairly significant number and unless you really need that small extra burst in framerates or responsiveness, the Ryzen 9 4900HS looks to be the overall better contender in this benchmark.
The differences further reduce in Cinebench R20 with almost no benefit seen in the Core i7-10875H's single-core scores compared to the Ryzen 9 4900HS. There is a significant delta when it comes to multi-core with both the Ryzen 9 4900HS and the Ryzen 7 4800H leading by 25% and 22%, respectively when compared to the Core i7-10875H.
Join our Support Satisfaction Survey 2023: We want to hear about your experiences!
Participate here
Core i7-10875H vs the competition — Other CPU benchmarks
In tests such as Blender, we see that the Core i9-9880H in the Apple MacBook Pro 16 is still able to beat the newer Core i7-10875H by 7%, which in turn is as much faster compared to the Ryzen 9 4900HS. A healthy 17% gain is seen with the Core i7-10875H compared to the Ryzen 9 4900HS in 7-Zip single core, but the AMD offering regains lost ground in the multi-core benchmark. A similar pattern is seen in Geekbench 4 as well. WinRAR is Intel's show all the way while AMD manages to offer decent leads in all TrueCrypt tests. When it comes to 3DMark Fire Strike Physics, AMD seems to have the upper hand here though not by much.
Cinebench R15 | |
CPU Single 64Bit | |
Gigabyte Aero 15 Studio XB | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (190 - 220, n=37) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 XA RP77 | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (181 - 215, n=13) | |
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (181 - 198, n=11) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Asus Strix Scar III G531GW | |
CPU Multi 64Bit | |
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
ASUS TUF Gaming A15 FX506IV | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506UI | |
Gigabyte Aero 15 Studio XB | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (1327 - 1930, n=14) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (1003 - 1833, n=38) | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (1317 - 1721, n=11) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 XA RP77 | |
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Asus Strix Scar III G531GW |
Cinebench R20 | |
CPU (Single Core) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 XA RP77 | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (430 - 524, n=32) | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (431 - 505, n=10) | |
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (441 - 474, n=7) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
CPU (Multi Core) | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506UI | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (2974 - 4150, n=10) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (1986 - 4176, n=32) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (2953 - 3712, n=7) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 XA RP77 | |
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng |
Blender - v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (317 - 527, n=3) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (293 - 384, n=4) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (259 - 535, n=30) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS |
7-Zip 18.03 | |
7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (5283 - 5642, n=4) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (5071 - 5780, n=31) | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (4837 - 5068, n=3) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
7z b 4 | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (29844 - 49562, n=31) | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (39455 - 46591, n=3) | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (39566 - 44081, n=4) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M |
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 | |
64 Bit Single-Core Score | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (5617 - 5972, n=3) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (5616 - 6016, n=5) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (5166 - 5605, n=3) | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
64 Bit Multi-Core Score | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (28711 - 31934, n=5) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (28625 - 30849, n=3) | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (28192 - 29798, n=3) |
WinRAR - Result | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (7266 - 7436, n=2) | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS |
3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Physics | |
Schenker XMG Ultra 17 Turing | |
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
Average AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506UI | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (15535 - 22530, n=32) | |
Gigabyte Aero 17 XA RP77 | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (11758 - 22463, n=11) | |
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng | |
Average Intel Core i9-9880H (14940 - 20125, n=8) | |
Asus Strix Scar III G531GW | |
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 i9 5500M |
* ... smaller is better
Top 10 Laptops
Multimedia, Budget Multimedia, Gaming, Budget Gaming, Lightweight Gaming, Business, Budget Office, Workstation, Subnotebooks, Ultrabooks, Chromebooks
under 300 USD/Euros, under 500 USD/Euros, 1,000 USD/Euros, for University Students, Best Displays
Top 10 Smartphones
Smartphones, Phablets, ≤6-inch, Camera Smartphones
Going purely by the CPU benchmark results, we see that Intel and AMD are fairly balanced at this point and the choice of CPU for your next notebook depends solely on your workflow. Intel still seems to offer the best single-core performance there is and with sufficient cooling, the higher-end Comet Lake-H chips can boost very well, although the gen-to-gen uplift itself isn't that significant. How long will these processors be able to sustain that boost remains to be seen, however.
We would need to factor in power draws and energy efficiency as well. We will discuss more about these factors in our full review of the Gigabyte Aero 17 HDR XB laptop very soon. Intel's 14nm process is now becoming archaic and the fact that the company could still milk the last drops of performance from what is essentially a Skylake chip is commendable but not in line with market expectations.
AMD, on the other hand, has come a long way with the Renoir Ryzen 4000 series and has managed to successfully bridge the single-core performance gap by a long shot. The Ryzen 9 4900HS leads the multi-core tests and will likely be the preferred choice of creative pros who also like to game. The Ryzen 9 4900HS's TDP is capped at 35W and combined with the benefits of the 7nm process and the purported improvements to battery life, AMD may just have clinched this generation.
Considering the impressive scores on show for AMD chips here, let's hope OEMs offer enough Ryzen 4000-powered laptops throughout the year so that consumers can enjoy a greater choice.
Source(s)
Own