Is there more to CPU than speed?

[bopper]

I recently purchased a new laptop- vivobook pro, Ryzen 7 5800H. My choice wasn't too difficult cause I wanted a 4k screen and pretty good graphics card... and a limited brand selection (I like the Asus hardware). I wish I doled out the extra $150 for the Ryzen 9 with 32gb ram. No reason for that... it's just better I guess. I've been doing a lot of research and doing shopping experiments with different goals (price, speed...). I mainly check processor "goodness" on versus.com. It seems that I've come up with two options. an $800 laptop with an i7-1165G7 or a $1,200 laptop with an i7-12700H or i7-1260P. I'm finding that laptop prices don't seem to make sense really at all. the 1165G7 is incredibly common and can range from $600 to $1500. Anything faster is $1200 and up. Some processors don't seem to have a reason to exist for the price. Lenovo doesn't seem to have a reason to exist for the price. I'll try to put my curiosity into some defined questions:

Is memory, benchmarks, and performance the only things a processor is judged by? I know there's integrated graphics and battery life things, but I don't see that making up the difference. Can a blazing fast processor be terrible at something a cheaper one is good at?

Are two very similar processors more different than they look (i5-12600 vs i7-12700)? I assume they are cause there dozens of (seemingly to me) minutely different models.

How fast do I really need? This is a loaded question, but all the answers I'm finding are non-answers. This is related to the first question i guess. I'm thinking that for 90% of the population, all the processors I've mentioned are overkill... but I can't back that up. I can compare processors on versus.com, but am I comparing a Ferrari to a Lamborghini?

Lenovo is a good example of why I'm confused. They have borderline ancient processors in $2000 machines. What gives?

 

[beers]

Depends on the overall package honestly, CPU is usually a significant component but there's plenty of other items that go into a laptop. Some brands simply increase prices due to marketing or brand recognition.

How are you enjoying your new one? This 5900HX has been really solid.

 

[bopper]

It's awesome. Not sure what my old one was, but it was a 10 year old budget gaming rig... I think 5th gen i7 with a GTX. The new 5800H seems almost instantaneous when I'm clicking on things. And the screen is astounding. One thing I notice is that this processor is relatively low on memory compared to the intels. Really no idea what CPU memory does... I mean I know the theory, but no idea what is adequate, what inadequate looks like, etc. I wish it had a beefier GPU than a 3050Ti. So far I've been able to run most of my current games on max, but for the price, the 3050Ti seems like a lacking decision by ASUS. AMD seems to have better bang for buck GPUs.

What else is there that matters for performance? I know there's CPU (assuming integrated graphics), and RAM. Not sure if the mother board has smarts in it or the different kinds of RAM.

I do think my ASUS hardware (keyboard, case, general feel) is the best out there. I've had HP and Lenovo for work. The ASUS keyboard is rock solid... no give or bendyness. I don't like the weird compact number pad though, and the speakers are incredibly quiet. My work ThinkPad L15 Gen1 i7-10510U seems dated and so did my HP. Both about the "snappyness" of my old laptop. It has a ton of ports tho which might lend to the bulkier body.

If I were to choose a work computer (which I may be tasked with), Id pick one of these. Any thoughts on these choices? I'm dying not being able to figure out if it's money wasted for the expensive ones. I'm also surprised that 32GB RAM is so rare outside of high end gaming and media machines.
$1,400: Zenbook Flip, i7-12700H, 1TB, OLED ($200 less for 512GB and lose some kind of Intel graphics)
$1,100: Zenbook 14, Ryzen 7 5900HX, 1 TB
$900: Vivobook S15, i7-1165G7, 512GB
$720: HP 15.6, same^ (original $800 but it seems it's a somewhat constant deal)

 

[beers]

Nice, I was pleasantly surprised with the screen on my Strix, figured it'd be a gimmicky panel that cheaped out just to get 300hz, but the color reproduction, brightness and viewing angles are quite good.

Depends what you mean by 'processor memory', usually RAM is just a larger amount of space to place your temporary/cached data for running applications. Performance deteriorates super hard if you start running out and need to start swapping between storage and RAM. I'd consider 16G as a minimum for 2022, but if you're just browsing the internet or something then you can get by with 8.

Performance depends on what sub component or intent you're referring to, CPU/RAM/GPU/Storage are usually the largest contributors, but different workloads leverage different resources in different ways. For example, you could have a 64 core Threadripper setup with 512G of RAM but if you're using a mechanical hard drive it's going to feel like a much worse experience just using Windows and opening non-cached applications than a NVME solution, as an extreme example.

As for suggesting one between those options, I'd probably just pick the best productivity features that you need, I have no idea what your profession is or how you use your computer. It may be worth rolling a Intel/Thunderbolt setup if you have a dock with multiple displays though, USBC 10Gbps on AMD setups is 'okay' but it's easier to pipe out to triple screens and charge the laptop (USB-PD) with a single cable onto the Thunderbolt interface on my work laptop. My home one has been pretty good for pushing a single 1440p@165hz panel though.

 

[bopper]

Maybe I don't mean processor memory. Processor Cache? The L1, 2, and 3 memories. My work laptop is hooked up to 2 screens and charger via a USB-C docking thing. I can't turn it on without opening the lid though, which is annoying. My old HP laptop had a docking station that was nice. Just plop it down and slide the switch. Both have screen wake issues tho. Neither have really impressed me.

I'm not sure what "productivity features" are. I (or anyone else) don't use very heavy stuff (I don't think). Most is network based or connected (If I hit save, it saves it on our server in the next room), and none has any graphics requirements (again, I don't think). Construction related software like finance, estimating, scheduling, excel, relatively heavy PDF reader. Some brands are Sage, Revu- Bluebeam, InEight- HardDollar. We also connect to our server via VPN and have remote access IT stuff. I'm pretty sure 16 RAM is min.

Edit: What I'm getting at is that I don't know what else there is to look for besides CPU (benchmarks, performance, cache), GPU, storage (capacity and SSD vs HDD), RAM (capacity), and ports (usb, hdmi...). Then there's stuff like weight, battery life, display type, size...

 

[bopper]

For a work computer, the above is a bit moot. I'm confined to Windows Pro, which really knocks out most off-shelf options. The Lenovo site seems to have the best deals and good value machines. I still haven't come up with an answer to the question tho.

 

[bopper]

This thread is old now, but i've discovered another important feature. My work laptop cannot support a 4k monitor via USB-C (via a docking station). It has a 5 Mbps and 10 Mbps USB-C port, but neither is satisfactory for 4k. It did fine with two 1080p monitors, but the 4k runs at ~15-20 fps. I currently have the charger and two 1080p monitors plugged into the dock and the 4k is plugged directly to the computer's HDMI. I imagine that thunderbolt is an easy feature to get now, and is necessary if you're going to run multiple screens.

 

[beers]

USB4 is also rolling out, which offers thunderbolt speeds (40 gbps) and similar capabilities.