I am thinking of buying a relatively cheap laptop that is reasonably powerful. I am at loss when it comes to new CPU naming and its compatibility with Linux (from both Intel/AMD). I prefer Ryzen 5 or Core 5 above with atleast 16GB RAM.
Framework laptops are not available where I live.
I saw some Reddit posts claiming AMD being not optimized for Linux particularly for arch related distros (I use EndeavourOS). I am thinking of buying a Thinkbook from Lenovo, but confused b/w team blue & red.
Which of these CPUs are better for running Linux long-term with respect to optimizations, power management, thermals, track pad support etc. If anyone has a laptop recommendation, please feel free to comment down below.
Also, should I go for a high end Laptop like Asus Zenbook S14? A lot of reviews are picking it as the best compact laptop to buy this year. Its expensive. But if it keeps working for a long time, like 6+ years, then I don’t mind investing.
Edit: I use Gnome as my DE with EndeavourOS, but can also try Debian 12 with Gnome.
You must log in or # to comment.
I wouldn’t be worried about buying AMD in terms of thermals, their laptop CPUs are fine. Usually, it’s the WiFi card that poses the biggest problem in terms of driver availability, in which case you can purchase an Intel WiFi card from Amazon for $15-$20. Battery and “optimizations” depend on your config and distro. Most plug-and-play distros should be fine OOTB, if you’re setting up Arch from scratch I assume you don’t have a problem in looking for drivers/compiling code.
Edit: I personally do not suggest that anyone buys a new laptop unless they do not have a choice (horrible used market or the like). There is a heavy mark-up on new devices and the used market in the West (especially in the US) is excellent if you’re OK with fiddling with some parts of your laptop (or not - sometimes you don’t even need to do that). But being in c/linux that’s about granted, eh?
I saw some Reddit posts claiming AMD being not optimized for Linux particularly for arch related distros (I use EndeavourOS)
This is literally the other way around.
But in general it depends on the budget. Both Intel and AMD work perfectly on Linux. It’s more about the CPUs themselves. AMD is better in the budget category because of much more capable iGPUs and performance/price ratio but Intel is better in high end because of simply better technological advancement (as long as you can keep the chip cooler than 90°C).
But if it keeps working for a long time, like 6+ years, then I don’t mind investing.
I wouldn’t be so optimistic about modern laptops, especially ones with dedicated GPUs. They don’t live for more than 2-3 years without repairs.
Are Intel cpus really better in the laptop department? Since in desktop they fell very far behind.
As I said, only in high end. I’m talking about i9s here and whatever the new name is. AMD just doesn’t keep up. Though it could already change. I’m not so sure.
Afaik Intel has been dropping the ball for a while now in every segment, low to high.
Yeah, that was my impression also. Couple that with the travesty that was 13th Gen overheating and their refusal to even acknowledge it for so long, and I would say AMD are the wiser investment.
Ultimately there isn’t that much difference in them for most applications, though. Bigger gains can be had with GPU, SSD and even just moar RAM.
It’s very easy to look this up. And the claim is false.
The tests I saw reported significantly higher performance on Intel. I’m really bad at searching stuff ngl. But that means Intel has pretty much 0 benefits nowadays so AMD is simply better for regular users and gamers.
Was it UserBenchmark by chance? I’ve seen some pretty sus numbers.
Hmm it could’ve been that. But also I saw a research paper and Intel won in almost every category there too.
Don’t have one, so can’t say from experience, but big.LITTLE arch with e and p cores sound very good for laptops.
Newer cores have way better graphics, so even that gap has narrowed if not closed. Iris seems quite capable.
I have an AMD laptop, have no issues with battery life, works like a charm.
Intel even with their architecture had bigger power draw in desktop CPU than AMD. But dunno about laptops.
Don’t get me wrong. I wasn’t arguing that AMD is bad.
The point was that Intel was not as bad as people seem to think. And innovation that was mentioned applies to three things in my opinion:
- big.LITTLE
- avx10 or whatever it is called now
- iris graphics
All 3 of these should be good for laptops.
And then there is this: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/09/testing-intels-next-gen-core-ultra-200v-cpus-ok-performance-great-battery-life/
They say battery life is comparable to Qualcomm.
as long as you can keep the chip cooler than 90°C
I’ve yet to see a laptop that can go through heavy load without throttling. The little cooler, which also cools the potential extra GPU, all with a tiny fan, are just a joke and sound like a jet engine.
Ryzen and AMD in general is perfect under linux, no configuration, just working out of the box on any debian/ubuntu derivatives. They are performant yet energy efficient in my experience so i really cant say anything bad about them.
Honestly you’re spoiled for choice when it comes to cpus, anything you’re looking at should for the most part “just work” as long as it’s within the last 3-8 generations of cpus (I’d recommend the last 2, since they significantly improved power efficiency and you’re going for a laptop). What you’ll mainly want to consider is linux support for the system devices (wifi, etc, etc) which you can Google per model and robustness of the device (which is slightly subjective, but a 1.1lbs 5mm thick whatever is generally less robust than say a ThinkPad).
if you want a hassle-free experience, go for a used Thinkpad a generation or two back, especially if you want Debian. if you buy a new Thinkpad, a) the software support isn’t there yet and b) you’re paying the corpo extortion tax for stuff you don’t need (IME and friends).
as to Intel vs AMD, whatever you choose will do fine for the vast majority of use cases; even the 1st gen T14 meets your specs (6-core, 16 GB on-board) and those can be had for $200ish; even less if you’re willing to tinker.
Either or
Linux will likely work fine.
Any reason you need a new one? I just got a Thinkpad T14 Gen 1 with a Ryzen 7 Pro 8 and 16gb of RAM for £200. Probably fast enough to everything except newer games and training AI.
I just went through this search for attending Uni, and unfortunately it’s almost impossible to get a reasonably-to-decently spec’d out laptop running AMD at the 14” size right now. The purpose was to avoid any 13th/14th gen intels for their recent issues, and increase it’s longevity.
What it boiled down to (for me) was: • Asus Zephyrus G14 (32GB Ram), or • Thinkpad P14s Gen 5
Ultimately went with the Zephyrus, and holy shit I’m glad I did, even with Win11.
Edit:
To clarify, Framework is available to me, but I couldn’t take a chance on class requirements. This video was very helpful in making the final decision.
You could pickup a older device. Get something well built that has a replaceable battery.
CES 2025 is just around the corner. I’d wait to get a new laptop now.
Obligatory Framework plug comment. Doesn’t matter which architecture you go for, they support Linux ootb and there are community threads for almost every distro. You can also upgrade it in a few years :D
I love the Framework project, and want one, but my god do you pay a premium for the modularity.
A Framework 13 with a 7840U, 512gb SSD, 16GB RAM costs £1400.
I can get a different laptop with equivalent specs (but with a much better OLED display) for £670, £620 for a Grade A refurbished one. I didn’t look hard. Literally the first result when I searched “7840U” at a retailer.
I love the modularity, but costing 2.1x as much is something I can’t justify.
Same reason I didn’t get a framework. I would’ve loved to get one, but couldn’t justify the price.
Framework laptops are not available where the OP lives. It was said in the description.
