Which is better in performance and power consumption, i7-8550U or i7-4720HQ?

The comparison between these two U's depends on the actual laptop and usage scenarios. There are many mistakes in the above answer.

In terms of performance alone, 4720hq is definitely stronger, 8550u is the latest U, and it also has the latest manufacturing technology (14nm). But in terms of performance alone, 4720 seconds is absolutely, and 8550u does have a higher single-core frequency, up to 4.0. But in practice, how many chances do you have to open a single software and eat a single kernel? General games don't just eat single core, so the highest frequency of single core is a gimmick, because it can't be achieved at all, so what should be achieved? Yes, it may be close to 4.0 without loading or running the software. Once the software is running, it is wishful thinking to maintain 4.0, so the most reliable CPU still depends on the full-core frequency, because the actual use will definitely not be single-core, so it depends on the full-core frequency.

Then it may be said that the 8550u full core is not 3.7? Higher than 4720, higher than 4720hq, but 4720hq has welfare frequency doubling, which can double the frequency, and the whole core can reach 3.6, not much difference.

So can the performance of the 8 th generation Core be different from that of the 4 th generation? No, Intel is a famous toothpaste factory. There is a gap, but it is not that big, so we can ignore the advantages of the core architecture.

Then watch tdp. This is the most ridiculous place, and it is also the key point that 8550u can't beat 4720hq. You can set 10w, 15w and 25w. From the point of view of power saving, yes, 8550u kills 4720hq, but from the point of view of performance, should 25w tdp maintain the full core frequency of 3.7? Wishful thinking, you think there is black technology? Do you still sell this standard 8700? It can indeed be achieved in practical use. Yes, 28s, the real man's time given by Intel, will wither after the time. Just like the king of barbarians in League of Legends, the big move is gg, 8550u wants to maintain the main frequency of 3.7, and if unlocked, tdp will be pulled to 44w (the highest tdp given by the government). At this time, you can get 7700hq, but in fact, you still can't beat it because you have to watch it. Generally, the heat dissipation scale of ultra-thin notebook can only be as high as 35w (maybe not yet), 25 to 35w, so even if you unlock tdp, 8550u will still hit the temperature wall and then reduce the frequency, which is no match for 4720hq. The tdp upper limit of the 4th generation U is 47w, and there is no upper limit after unlocking (because it can no longer be reached, the main frequency is so high), and the 4th generation U has 99. Games that don't eat CPU, that is to say, games that eat CPU, 8550u is definitely not good)

Then watch the nuclear display. If it's a nuclear test, say something unpleasant. It's no use. What is power saving? Reasonably speaking, low load seems to be single-digit power consumption. How much electricity can you save? If you save electricity, the hd4600 of 4720hq is not bad, it seems to be only 3w? You said the performance was good. There are several games that can be played with kernel display, which makes sense. For example, lol, hd4600 can't run away, and the picture quality can't be reduced to full height, but is there a difference? So the nuclear display can't open any gaps, and there is no need to play games. No matter how strong it is, it must be equipped with a good solo display. Just watch the video and brush the web page. Now the nuclear display can be used because it doesn't need any performance.

Then memory, d4 kills d3, which is a big joke. Spike means spike. According to the actual test, the reading and writing performance of d3 1600 and d4 2400 are almost the same, d3 1866 and d4 2800 are almost the same, and d3 2 133 and d4 3000 are almost the same. I don't remember the comparison of frequency reading and writing performance between d3 and d4, but you just need to understand that d3 and d4 can't widen the gap in notebooks (in fact, the higher the frequency, the difference in reading and writing performance between d4 and d3 will be slightly improved, but it doesn't mean to kill d3 on the road). The timing of d4 is much worse than d3 because it has to reach a higher frequency. If you don't know the timing, you can Baidu it. The significance of timing to memory, so it is wishful thinking for d4 to kill D3. The only advantage is me.

Summary: In many ways, these two U's should not be compared, because the actual application platforms are different. One is ultra-thin book, battery life is the purpose, and the other is game book, and performance is the purpose. If I put 8550u in the game book, why not go to 8700hq? Manufacturers are not that stupid. Compared with the low voltage U in the past, the improvement of 8550u is not a little bit. For the office, real man time can improve the efficiency of opening and editing documents, which is quite different from the actual experience of low-voltage U in the past. After all, it has been upgraded to 4 cores, so it is still the first choice for battery life.

But if you are a game user, please don't consider low-voltage U, because the platform of this kind of CPU is ultra-thin notebook, aiming at battery life and portability. Compared with the game, this kind of notebook has much less heat dissipation, and it will not be equipped with a good independent display for battery life. Because the independent display needs an extra radiator, many ultra-thin notebooks are only equipped with a low-end independent display like 940mx, which is better than the nuclear display, but it has low power consumption and low heat dissipation pressure.