@AndreiD Of course they are not linked, you put a larger better than TDP cooler on it and it can exceeded its TDP rating, especially if you overclock it, in fact then it will.
You know what, i'm running out of ways to explain this..... lets do it your way.
i5 8250U 15 Watts + MX150 25 Watts = 40 Watts: actual power consumption 50 Watts, thats 25% over TDP but well'll just ignore that, eh?
Ryzen 5 2500U + i can't remember the name of the IGPU = 15 Watts, apparently: actual power consumption 45 Watts 3 times TDP but we still have those blinkers on so....... yeah.
The battery life is a few minutes longer on the Intel system out of 5 hours, they are both just over 5 hours on identical systems.
The CPU performance is a bit better on the Ryzen System, not a lot, its a bit, Ryzen's iGPU is 3 times faster than Intel's but the one you want us to look at is a different laptop using an nVidia SoC GPU, essentially a glued on GT 1030, it scores about 2600 in Firestrike the Ryzen iGPU about 2200, so about an 18% difference in performance.
The GT 1030 is a Pascal card, the Ryzen APU has a Vega GPU in it, we know Pascal is a lot more power efficient than Vega, right? the performance per watt is much higher with Pascal.
Your Intel Laptop, with its slower CPU and GT 1030 is using 10 watts more power, thats 10% more than the Ryzen Laptop, that leaves at best 10% to the Pascal GPU, does the Pascal GPU have 10% better performance per watt, or is it more than that? whats the power consumption of Vega 56, my 1070 is 150 Watts, is Vega 56 165 Watts? or is it about 250 Watts?
Now, with all of that considered what exactly is your point in all of this, why did you post those slides comparing power consumption between these different AMD and Intel configured Laptops?
Because it, 'like the rest of the slides posted by me and you' does not make Intel efficiency look much good compared with the AMD systems.
You know what, i'm running out of ways to explain this..... lets do it your way.
i5 8250U 15 Watts + MX150 25 Watts = 40 Watts: actual power consumption 50 Watts, thats 25% over TDP but well'll just ignore that, eh?
Ryzen 5 2500U + i can't remember the name of the IGPU = 15 Watts, apparently: actual power consumption 45 Watts 3 times TDP but we still have those blinkers on so....... yeah.
The battery life is a few minutes longer on the Intel system out of 5 hours, they are both just over 5 hours on identical systems.
The CPU performance is a bit better on the Ryzen System, not a lot, its a bit, Ryzen's iGPU is 3 times faster than Intel's but the one you want us to look at is a different laptop using an nVidia SoC GPU, essentially a glued on GT 1030, it scores about 2600 in Firestrike the Ryzen iGPU about 2200, so about an 18% difference in performance.
The GT 1030 is a Pascal card, the Ryzen APU has a Vega GPU in it, we know Pascal is a lot more power efficient than Vega, right? the performance per watt is much higher with Pascal.
Your Intel Laptop, with its slower CPU and GT 1030 is using 10 watts more power, thats 10% more than the Ryzen Laptop, that leaves at best 10% to the Pascal GPU, does the Pascal GPU have 10% better performance per watt, or is it more than that? whats the power consumption of Vega 56, my 1070 is 150 Watts, is Vega 56 165 Watts? or is it about 250 Watts?
Now, with all of that considered what exactly is your point in all of this, why did you post those slides comparing power consumption between these different AMD and Intel configured Laptops?
Because it, 'like the rest of the slides posted by me and you' does not make Intel efficiency look much good compared with the AMD systems.
