Your Ryzen laptop is (probably) throttled quite heavily when on battery - and it's (probably?) not a huge deal

[pas008]

10 hours ago, RejZoR said:

This could expain why my Ryzen 2500U was skipping sound and desync video in MPC-HC when I tried watching on battery... As soon as it was plugged, all was fine.

With my rog lap I reinstalled Windows 10 but to pro cause I thought something was messing up lol did get rid of bloat though and didn't reinstall many of the rog stuff too

 

Then found ryzen controller to be very useful also 

 

[Silentprototipe]

For a Ryzen 2k and 4k mobile owner this is not even close to surprising. Its always been like this to conserve battery. If it has to it will burst hard but will stay in the low 1 Ghz range to preserve battery life 

[D13H4RD]

On 7/13/2021 at 6:01 PM, Justaphysicsnerd said:

I mean I bought an HP omen 15 just a few weeks before CES, it has a 5600H and a 1660Ti. And It is one of the best machines out there as it has both the power and the battery life (I got 9-10 hours on regular usage which is pretty good). The Intel laptops which have a D-GPU like a 60series or higher card don't have the battery life when even using the integrated GPU, in fact at the time I bought it. The Intel i7-1085something something was on sale for the same price but since it runs much hotter and doesn't have decent battery life I didn't buy it. The average AMD buyer buys the machine for the efficiency and power not just power

10 hours on that machine is pretty good. I average around 7-8 on my 1135G7-equipped machine, likely due to the smaller 50Wh battery. 

 

This figure was attainable if I put a muzzle on the processor so that it didn't go ham on the turbo through the use of a power saver plan. In balanced mode, I got closer to 5 hours. 

 

If AMD had let the processor run in a similar way to my 1135G7 on balanced, the battery life differences would probably even out. Because they didn't, they were able to squeeze extra hours out of the battery, even though performance was sacrificed as a result, but in terms of perceived performance, the difference shouldn't be noticeable. I certainly didn't have much issues using my muzzled 1135G7 for normal use. 

[GalacticRuler]

Honestly I feel that AMD has the better approach to this in terms of how the vast majority of people would want and expect their laptop to function. If I want to play games or do heavy workloads, I'm going to plug in. If I'm on battery, I probably won't be doing much more than browsing the web or typing up a document. Frankly, I thought that all laptops operated like that, before Intel started pointing fingers at AMD for doing something obvious. Even my tech-illiterate family plugs in their laptop if they want to do anything intensive.

 

I guess you could say that phones operate in an opposite manner, running faster when on battery, but that's for a different reason. If a phone is charging its battery and running at maximum power, it's going to heat up very quickly to the point where it might even become too hot to touch. But laptops operate differently, and that thermal argument is generally irrelevant because you don't hold your laptop by the battery.

[D13H4RD]

6 hours ago, GalacticRuler said:

Honestly I feel that AMD has the better approach to this in terms of how the vast majority of people would want and expect their laptop to function. If I want to play games or do heavy workloads, I'm going to plug in. If I'm on battery, I probably won't be doing much more than browsing the web or typing up a document. Frankly, I thought that all laptops operated like that, before Intel started pointing fingers at AMD for doing something obvious. Even my tech-illiterate family plugs in their laptop if they want to do anything intensive.

Yep, that's the way it usually has been. 

 

Though I will admit, having a laptop that largely maintains its performance off the charger has been nice for photo-editing on the go, especially in places where charge points aren't easy to come by, but I also understand that my usecase is quite specific. 

 

For what it's worth, I don't think Intel's approach is any more or less "wrong", or "correct". It's just different, so they really shouldn't claim superiority, especially if they have to sacrifice runtime for it. 

[GalacticRuler]

26 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Yep, that's the way it usually has been. 

 

Though I will admit, having a laptop that largely maintains its performance off the charger has been nice for photo-editing on the go, especially in places where charge points aren't easy to come by, but I also understand that my usecase is quite specific. 

 

For what it's worth, I don't think Intel's approach is any more or less "wrong", or "correct". It's just different, so they really shouldn't claim superiority, especially if they have to sacrifice runtime for it. 

Yeah, I'm not trying to say that Intel's approach is "wrong," more pointing out that Intel's tactics in singling out AMD for their approach is really just underhanded, especially when a larger portion of laptop users benefit from the latter's approach.