INTEL vs AMD LAPTOPS! Which CPU is better and what to buy?

What laptop should you buy and what CPU you shold opt for: Intel or AMD? Who is currently manufacturing better CPUfor laptops, Intel or AMDThat's a big one, it s up there with... ithere a GodBut first of all, how did we manage to levethe playing field to make the fight as faias possibleWhat we were looking for were two identicaplatforms in absolutely every respect, thonly differentiator being the CPU. And after some digging we found two ASUS TUlaptops that were nearly twins, the only differencbeing the CPU. So, in the blue corner, there's a TUF GaminF15 powered by an Intel Core i7-12700H CPUand in the red corner, a TUF Gaming A15 equippewith an AMD Ryzen 7 6800H CPU. Other than their brains , the two machineare identical: RTX 3060 GPUs, 16GB of DDRRAM, and 1TB NVMe SSDs, and the exact samcooling system. The laptops look the same, smell the samand most important, they give us an undeniableven playing field. We've got four hot rounds coming up, botliterally and metaphorically, so have sombeer, or soda, if you're underage, grab sompopcorn, and make yourselves comfortable foan epic battleToday's fight is not just between these twCPU models. In fact, it is on a larger scale, as the twCPU models on our TUF laptops are actuallrepresenting their respective product families. And given all that, it makes sense to starby comparing Alder Lake to Zen 3+. We'll kick off with the blue camp becauswe've been testing a lot of laptops with 12tGen Intel Core CPUs lately. And this generation brings some significannew additions to the market. The release of the 12th Gen Core CPUs folaptops marks the introduction of the Inte7 concept. That's how the manufacturer chose to namits architecture and even though it sounda little like a conspiracy theory, I hava feeling this was done to trick the masof enthusiasts still criticizing Intel fothe 14nm+++ story. So Intel 7 is actually a 10nm architecture. Until recently, it was safe to say the battlbetween manufacturers was fought in this uniof measurement, especially back in the daywhen progress between generations meant movinfrom 32nm to 22nm for example. But nowdays, that difference from 10 to or even 6 nano no longer matters that much. I've seen it on desktops and I promise yothat the same principle also holds true olaptops. The Core i7-12700H we're discussing todaycomes with two different types of cores. On the one hand you have the P cores, whicare the performance ones, and in additioyou have the E cores, focusing on efficiency. Put them together, and they make a balanceproduct good for heavy-duty tasks like gaminand video editing, but also capable of savinpower when you're browsing, editing documentand watching movies. And if any of this rings a bell, it's becauswe've seen this approach on ARM processors. I mean the ones found in phones or new laptopand more recently in Apple's compact desktopswhich are actually ARM. Also, Intel's 12th Gen brought DDR5 memorto mobile platforms, improved connectivitwith USB 3.2 Gen 2 and Wi-Fi 6E. And now let's move on to the Ryzen 6000, whicalso shares some of these features. However, while not so long ago AMD didn'really have a foothold in the portable sectorthe Ryzen 6000 changes all that, and it'the first time ever that a series of AMD laptoCPUs are challenging Intel's very comfortablplace in this market. And I m saying this because it's also thfirst time that a CPU from the red camp reache5GHz in Boost. And that's not counting its more efficienarchitecture and better integrated graphics. And know let's do a direct comparison of thtwo processors. And actually, these are exactly the modelthat people can afford, but still deliveenough performance to mitigate the lack oa Core i9 or Ryzen 9. And for that, of course, we have a chartAnd once you take a look at this specs charyou can clearly see the pros and cons of eacCPU. The Intel Core i7 has more cores and morthreads, but some of those extra cores aron the efficient side, and there are 20 threadin total. On the other hand, AMD has equipped the Ryze7 with eight massive cores, together wit16 corresponding threads. And you'll see for yourself later on, in thactual tests that even if Intel seems to havthe upper hand here, the gap is nowhere neawhat you'd expect from a CPU with six coreand four threads EXTRAWhen it comes to cache memory, Intel use24MB of Smart Cache memory. AMD went for a classic three-level memorsetup for a total of 20MB. So Intel comes out on top from the specs perspective. When we come to the clock rate both modelreach 4.7GHz in Boost. Another interesting category is RAM compatibilityas AMD uses DDR5 RAM exclusively, while thCPU in the blue camp can also handle DDR4. That means Intel can integrate its chips intmultiple devices across different market sectors. Next, I wouldn't consider on-board GPUs tbe of paramount importance, because we'rtalking about powerful CPUs that are oftecoupled with equally capable video cards. But if you're interested in the performancdelivered by the built-in GPU, AMD wins ba landslide over Intel. This is made possible by the Radeon 680M chiprunning 12 RDNA 2 graphic cores. As such, its performance is on par with thaof an affordable desktop video card, whicseems like a significant win for the Red camp. Regardless of your choice though, both optionguarantee an HDMI 2.1 connection capable ohandling resolutions up to 8K. But setting aside the integrated graphicsthis round's winner is the Core i7. Despite its 10nm architecture, it has morcores, more threads, more cache memory, ancombining raw power with energy efficiencis a more cutting-edge solution, so... amuch as I'd like to side with the underdogit's obvious that Intel has more experiencwhen it comes to laptop CPUs. As for AMD, I think it deserves several roundof applause for finally being a strong contendein this sector, but it's hard to beat whathe 12700H has to offer here. Intel's core system made all the differencetogether with the support for more RAM standardswhich makes it more versatile in configurations. And the specs, while not that important, alsweigh in favor of the Core i7, which is whI would say this first round ends favorablfor the blue corner. AMD has tried and succeeded at offering ainteresting feature set, and with its 6nm-onlTSMC architecture and clock speeds rivalinIntel's, it's not a bad choice at all. However, after this initial comparison opaper, it's time to see what each of thesmodels can deliver in practice and find ouwhich of the CPUs is more powerful. After all, specs mean nothing unless theare backed up by real-life performance. In this second round, I will only be lookinat raw performance, not power usage or temperatureswe'll covere that later. Let's start with 3D Mark and PC Mark. We used TimeSpy and Firestrike Extreme frothe 3D Mark suite and conducted a full teswith PC Mark. During the first round of tests, the Ryze7 outperformed the Core i7. Despite the narrow victory, this is stilan achievement, and we have to factor in thspec difference between the two CPUs. Let's move on to PC Mark, where the win goeto the blue camp, but again, it was reallclose and I guess it was the single-core performancthat won the day here. After this first test, the two CPUs needea short intermission to cool down. Having returned from their break, I threthem into Cinebench, both the R20 and R2versions. This is where we started to spot some differenceand feel the single-core edge of the InteCPU. And even though I saw this coming, I didn'expect the small multi-core gap between thtwo CPUs. The i7 scores a 14-15% lead in single-cortests, a feat consistent across testing sessionsbut however, I find the multicore resultmore fascinating. Bear in mind that the blue CPU has the uppehand because it features significantly morcores. But just like I said, this difference, althougseemingly big, still seems small to me. WhyBecause the on-paper specs state that Intehas 40% more cores, and a 20% advantage wheyou consider the number of threads. And from this perspective the performancmargin is small. The last tests conducted were V-Ray Benchmarand POV-Ray. The results don't stray too far from the earliepattern, and the Core i7 came out on top oncagain. But since many people are getting these laptopfor gaming, I wanted to test this aspect awell. After all, both systems come with an RTX 3060so we got some firepower. I chose three major mainstream titles, namelCS:GO, Cyberpunk 2077 and Metro Exodus EnhanceEdition. The settings were cranked all the way up eactime, and I ran my tests in two differenresolutions: FullHD and 1440p. The difference was more substantial hereand the Intel CPU performed better in Counter-Strike. Again, it's definitely because of the single-corperformance. The distance between the two CPUs did closwhen playing the more serious titles thoughso while there was a slight gap in Cyberpun2077 and Metro Exodus, it wasn't somethinthat affected the overall gameplay. Even if the difference is often really tinythe Core i7- prevailed against the Ryzen anscored slightly better in most tests. There were some exceptions, of course, buthis second round's victory also goes to thblue corner. If I didn't have the gaming results, especiallthe Counter-Strike ones, I would have calleit even and awarded the CPUs one point each. Yeah, I know, Intel bought you guys off anall that nonsense. Well, no, they didn'tActually they have no ideea we are doing this. Nevertheless, these were the tests, both synthetiand in games, and the numbers don't lie. Still, the Ryzen 7 deserves all the praise. Even though it comes with weaker specs anhas a shortage of cores, it manages to keeup with its competitor and even surpass iin certain scenarios. And that on-paper difference doesn't translat1:1 into reality, which is important for thred corner and should lift AMD's spirits athey gear up for round number three. The score is currently two-nil in favor othe Intel CPU, but so far the AMD has puup an exceptionally good and clean fight. And now let's enter the third round of thirumble, one where the red corner has an advantage. The problem here is that Core i7 laptop imuch warmer even when idle. Any task, no matter how simple, immediatelelevates the temperature of the Intel modeto over 60 degrees. And a gaming laptop reaching these temperaturewith the air conditioning on and with jusa Chrome tab active, is a serious issue. I actually managed to get the Intel laptointo throttle before I even started testinitAnd no, I'm not kidding, a few open appsan installer, some YouTube music and thawas enough to get me past 90 degrees. All the while, AMD's CPU was chillin'. It broke a sweat under heavy load, but nowhernear the Intel on the twin laptop. This is where I noticed the first big differencthough. While both had the same cooling profile, thASUS TUF A15 was much louder under load, whilTUF F15 was quiet but very hot. So I decided to take a closer look at hothe two laptops perform during a gaming sessioand in a few other tests. I'll start with the clock rate, where theboth scored well and reached their potentiaof 4700MHz in Turbo. The Core i7 reached a maximum of 4690MHzwhile AMD performed slightly better at 4,755MHz. A 65MHz difference that... might have mattereback in 2005. Moreover, although AMD reached a higher clocspeed, it managed to do so at a significantllower energy cost. In addition, the blue CPU's 105W power usagalso amounts to more heat and a shorter batterlife, compared to the mere 80W the Ryzen needs. And that 25W gap is certainly showing. The maximum temperatures are similar. AMD reached 93 degrees C and Intel went ahigh as 95. Except that, all the while the i7 was desperatelstruggling to survive the extreme heat, whilyou might say the Ryzen 7 had the air conditioninon. And that meant a trouble-free experience fothe red camp, which didn't throttle at alwhile gaming and was only brought down ba few consecutive Cinebench R23 benchmarks. And also remember how I was that my i7 gointo throttle... running ChromeSo the winner of this round is hands dowAMD Ryzen 7 6800H. With considerably lower energy consumptioand better overall ratings than the competitionAMD's Ryzen actually impressed me. Although the chassis and cooling in the twlaptops are identical, the software improvementand minor hardware differences made theimark. And here's how AMD gets an extremely importanwin, and from where I stand, one that wilprobably make a big difference when it cometo the final result. Yes, there is no doubt that Intel manageto perform better overall, but the 15-20gap in benchmarks and less than 10% gap igaming is nothing compared to the user experiencof a laptop that throttles up in a browseversus one that keeps it cool even durinlong gaming sessions. But keep in mind that this is a particulacase and this behavior is happening on twextremely similar platforms, basically twidentical laptops. Depending on the build, you might find laptopthat perform better with the Intel CPU, oAMD's advantage will only get bigger. The cooling system on each machine has a direcinfluence over these results, but the Refaction is the clear winner in this particulascenario. Now that AMD has made up a hugely importanpoint, it's time to enter the final round. A round where we will spend less time discussintechnicalities and focus more on what a regulauser typically does on such laptops, namelthe user experience. I was able to spend some time with both othem during my testing sessions and observtheir behavior, notice where they shine anwhich areas are lacking, and with everythinI learned, I'm convinced this will be thmost challenging round. I tried using both laptops simultaneously. I pressed Install on both at the same timegave them identical tasks, used the same testsand I have to tell you that the Intel felfaster, snappier throughout the entire session. This isn't new however, I've felt that alson Intel desktop CPUs before. On the other hand, it seemed to me that AMwould have clearly scored better in multi-cortasks if it had the same number of cores anthreads. But when it came to heavy gaming, 3D benchmarkand other demanding tasks, the Ryzen 7 helits own heroically putting both types of corein the Core i7 to shame. Intel may have more cores, but at the enof the day eight powerful cores are eighpowerful cores, which are doubled by SMT technologfor a total of 16 threads. Better still, the scales in this round artipped in AMD's favor by one last cruciafactor: the case temperature. Although I don't often talk about this, usinthese laptops for a longer amount of timhas made me realize how uncomfortable a hokeyboard or case can become. I was able to use the Ryzen-powered TUF A1in my lap, while the Intel-powered F15 wauncomfortable to handle even when placed omy desk. Wherever you touch it, the Intel model appearto be running a fever. The winner of this round is definitely AMD. And now that we're at the end of the showdownit's time to pick a winner. One is stronger and faster but hotter, anthe other is cooler, more composed but doesn'reach the same level of performance... sometimes. Although it was quite hard to decide, I hato choose a victor. I think I'd go for the AMD, simply becausI can't use a laptop that gets so hot, anthe battery, the 25W lower power usage, favorthe A15 setup. On the other hand, for those looking to squeezevery drop of performance out of their laptopsthe F15 may be the better choice. If you push its cooling to the max, slap somheadphones on you can enjoy as much FPS pedollar as possible. But despite being an older platform, the Ryzeis more efficient, and with a lower price-taI'd argue that you shouldn't splurge on thIntel version... if you can find the AMD onin stock. And now that we had our say, it s your turto answer this great question in the commentsection: Intel or AMDWhich one is better in your opinionLet's have a poll in the comments and I'be very glad if you could explain your choice. And after answering, if you found this videentertaing or even usefull, subscribe to ouchannel, while I'll start reading your comments!