Performance differences between Quiet and Performance mode

[dragonpoo]

Hi everyone! In playing with the different modes on the AMR5, performance has been pretty impressive. Doing some benchmarks, I found some interesting details.

https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V10/ ... 7382322741 - Run in performance mode

Perform.png (29.7 KiB) Viewed 5481 times

https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V10/ ... 7382739275 - Run in Silent mode

Silent.png (25.48 KiB) Viewed 5481 times

The CPU performance of Silent mode is about 75% of that of Performance mode. I wasn't sure what to expect but that seems pretty decent. Graphics performance is actually pretty comparable, but there's some noticeable differences, with Performance winning. I also did some graphic conversions, and found similar differences, Silent mode taking about 25% longer than Performance mode to complete my tasks. When performing, the fan is noticeable.

So there's a difference. It's still a cute little machine and I love playing with it. I'm going to try some other operating systems when I get a chance.

[Gabe]

Great info. You can see a good bit of difference in the CPU Mark ratings.

I've been tending to keep mine in Auto mode. When I was testing some different games I was switching between modes to see if there was any notable difference, but the games I have are older and can be played perfectly even in Silent mode, so I didn't really see any variance.

I really like this unit.

[dragonpoo]

From your signature, I see we went with the same model - it's hard NOT to go with the best specs for sale on Amazon, since the prices were so similar. 5th gen Ryzen is pretty impressive, as is the 16GB of RAM and 512GB SSD. I wonder how they compare to the lower spec systems. Passmark showed the 4th gen Ryzen was much slower than the 5th gen.

Maybe I should try auto mode, but I've always been one for manual control over as much as I can.

[Gabe]

I bet with some later, more graphics intensive games the differences would be noticeable, at least to an extent.

That similarity in price is quite interesting. The model with the later, better CPU for only $20 more? Wow. When it got it the price difference was a bit larger.

[dragonpoo]

I bet with some later, more graphics intensive games the differences would be noticeable, at least to an extent.

That similarity in price is quite interesting. The model with the later, better CPU for only $20 more? Wow. When it got it the price difference was a bit larger.

Actually, the pricing (and coupon) changed from when I bought it as well, so it's curious how fluid that is. Plus, for people who get it using the sale links in the forum, it's an even better value.

[Gabe]

The following are the PassMark Performance Test 10 results from each mode. Regarding the graphics, I wasn't paying attention to all of the tests for all three, but I did catch that, during the Star Wars looking part of the 3D test while running the benchmark in Performance Mode, there was an automatic penalization of 60% for not being in 4k, as I only have a 1080p monitor. It's likely that at least the 3D graphics results, and the overall score, would be a bit better if I had a 4k monitor.

Silent Mode.jpg (54.87 KiB) Viewed 5382 times

Auto Mode.jpg (54.83 KiB) Viewed 5382 times

Performance Mode.jpg (55.47 KiB) Viewed 5382 times

[dragonpoo]

The following are the PassMark Performance Test 10 results from each mode. Regarding the graphics, I wasn't paying attention to all of the tests for all three, but I did catch that, during the Star Wars looking part of the 3D test while running the benchmark in Performance Mode, there was an automatic penalization of 60% for not being in 4k, as I only have a 1080p monitor. It's likely that at least the 3D graphics results, and the overall score, would be a bit better if I had a 4k monitor.

I noticed the 60% penalty, and when I ran Passmark on my Lenovo gaming system, it didn't get a message like that. I wonder why. I don't have a 4K monitor to test on, though.

[Gabe]

I noticed the 60% penalty, and when I ran Passmark on my Lenovo gaming system, it didn't get a message like that. I wonder why. I don't have a 4K monitor to test on, though.

That's interesting. Maybe it has something to do with the difference in the graphics capabilities between the AMR5 and the Lenovo, even though it wasn't in 4K with either one.

[dragonpoo]

I noticed the 60% penalty, and when I ran Passmark on my Lenovo gaming system, it didn't get a message like that. I wonder why. I don't have a 4K monitor to test on, though.

That's interesting. Maybe it has something to do with the difference in the graphics capabilities between the AMR5 and the Lenovo, even though it wasn't in 4K with either one.

That's what I suspect as well. I actually had the AMR5 plugged in to the same keyboard, mouse, speakers, and monitor as the Lenovo, so the only difference in my tests was the computer base system. I'm not as worried about the 60% penalty, and some day hope to have a 4K screen to use, but until then, I still think it's a snappy little system.