I took the plunge, and snagged one of the AMD 13 R5 boards, here’s a collection of benchmarks from it.
Framework Specs: AMD 7640U, 2x16GB @ 5600MT/s CL40, Gen4 NVME, v3.03 UEFI.
Notes: Windows 11 Pro X64, Mainline AMD Driver (24.1.1, Hyper-RX Enabled globally) Plugged in (Official 60Watt), Best Performance power mode, iGPU Game mode set in UEFI (Using this mode, some games reported greater than 16GB of VRAM, most reported ~4GB). I expect that like the i7 11th gen that some of these scores would be moderately improved by swapping the paste and pads, due to an issue with one of my ports I am holding off on that at this time to see about getting it replaced. Utilizing the Hyper-RX mode from a high level summary is rendering the game at a set resolution and then scaling it up to the monitor resolution, this makes use of some frame generation technologies, and based on my experience with it thus far, I’d suggest utilizing it for most scenarios.
TLDR; The R5 is a very solid offering for the price point and provides a good increase in the gaming experience over say, the 11th Gen i7. I do not regret my choice. Hopefully we can get some cross talk on some games to determine the spread for the R7 v the R5.
-
Game: Armored Core VI
- FPS: 1680x1050 (High)
- In garage : 38-40FPS
- First Mission: 35-45FPS, pretty happily locks to 40FPS.
- FPS: 1680x1050 (Low)
- In Garage: 58-60
- First Mission: 48 - 80+FPS
- FPS: 1680x1050; Hyper-RX (Low)
- In Garage: 58-60
- First Mission : 51 - 90+ FPS, pretty happily locks to 50FPS
- Notes: Defaulted to “High” quality settings at 1680x1050(16:10). Set Frame rate limit to 120 to try to remove the cap. the game has a pretty vague “auto” detection system to maintain framerates, I suspect it drops the resolution or settings as needed to up the framerate, this was kept on for these benchmarks. When the game is set to limit 60FPS, the Hyper-RX run jumped to a 55-60 fps range and stayed there.
-
Game: Metro Exodus Enhanced
-
FPS: Native (2256x1504):
- Min: 9.36
- Max: 20.32
- Avg: 14.33
-
FPS: 1920x1080 HIGH
- Min: 11.95
- Max: 28.31
- Avg: 19.86
-
FPS: 1920x1080 LOW; Hyper-RX
- Min: 18.57
- Max: 36.62
- Avg: 27.13
-
Settings: “High”; RTX/DLSS turned off.
-
Resolution: Native (2256x1504), 1920x1080.
-
Notes: Built in Benchmark “HIGH”, The benchmark takes a long time to load the first time as it builds a cache. Lots of Texture pop-in for native resolution. As the benchmark is outside of the game, Hyper-RX doesn’t recognize it most runs (It magically saw it on the low run). Suggest running this title with Hyper-RX set to a lower res, and cranking the settings down to low with those items I suspect that a 30-45 FPS average is do-able.
-
Game: Forza Horizon 4
- FPS:
- Min: 72.7
- Max: 88.4
- Avg: 80.2
- Settings: Default “HIGH”, MSAA x2,
- Resolution: 1080p; Hyper-RX to Native (2256x1504).
- Notes: Hyper-RX enabled, Built in benchmark, the game failed to identify hardware and defaulted to “HIGH”, benchmark reported 70-80% GPU utilization, Benchmark reports that 60FPS target was reached.
-
Game: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim SE
- FPS:
- Whiterun : 30-40
- Winterhold: 35-45
- Settings: Default “ultra”
- Resolution: Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: No Mods, Defaulted to “Ultra Quality”, I am sure that some tweaking, say, Medium/low settings would make this a solid 60FPS title at Native resolution.
-
Game: Cyberpunk 2077 V 2.11 (Phantom liberty)
- FPS: Native “High”
- Min: 11.33
- Avg: 16.00
- Max: 23.09
- FPS: Native “Sane”
- Min: 19.93
- Avg: 24.64
- Max: 30.49
- FPS: 1920x1080; Hyper-RX “sane”
- Min: 28.43
- Avg: 34.49
- Max: 42.96
- FPS: 1920x1080; Hyper-RX low
- Min: 32.93
- Avg: 41.33
- Max: 52.15
- Settings: “Sane” for this system is preset low, RTX disabled. For the final Hyper-RX run, I dropped everything manually to it’s lowest setting.
- Resolution: Native (2256x1504), and 1920x1080 Hyper-RX
- Notes: No Mods, Game defaulted to native res “high” settings with low Ray tracing, FSR 2.1 “auto” (not sure why it did that), Built in Benchmark utilized. The text/screen jumped in/out of focus, I assume as FSR/Hyper-RX was trying to do its thing. I did not enable FSR for this title after I changed from the defaults. I expect that utilizing a lower initial resolution like 720p might bump this up into the 45+ range making for a playable albeit blurry experience.
-
Game: Red Dead Redemption 2
- FPS: 38 - 55 (witnessed) scene dependent.
- Settings: (Recommended by the game) Ultra Textures, FSR Off, low lighting, no Anisotropic filtering, Shadows low, Ambient Occlusion medium, Reflections low, TAA medium, Vulcan API,
- Resolution: 1920x1080 Fullscreen; Hyper-RX to Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: Built in Benchmark run, some heavy stutter on the valentine scene. I expect that with some tuning, 60FPS is in reach.
- Final Report (benchmark)
- Min: 4
- Max: 64
- Average: 41
-
Game: SnowRunner
- FPS:
- Native (2256x1504): 20-40
- 1920x1080: 45-60
- 1920x1080; Hyper-RX : 51-61
- Settings: Collection of medium/low based on what the game recommended. TAA Off.
- Resolution: Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: I expect with tuning a locked 60FPS is possible in most scenarios. The 1440x900 resolution was not available as an option for this game as it was with the Intel Xe iGPU so 1080p is stretched.
-
Game: Grid Autosport
- FPS:
- Min: 89
- Max: 131
- Avg: 105
- Settings: default settings (medium mix)
- Resolution: Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: Built in Benchmark, some texture/asset pop-in observed during the test, mainly set pieces, not cars or boundaries.
-
Game: Frost Punk
- FPS: 30-45, seems to be a very stable 30 with spikes upwards.
- Settings: Everything off/low)
- Resolution: Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: same endgame village as the 11th gen runs (Most objects/highest demand), game defaulted to “HIGH” settings, High Settings provided a similar experience to the 11th gen, but very stutter filled.
-
Game: GhostRunner
- FPS: Native (2256x1504) “Default” : 30-40 Very stutter filled
- FPS: Native (2256x1504) “Low” : 25-30 Very stutter filled (Not sure why/how it went down)
- FPS: 1920x1080; Hyper-RX “Low” : 25-35, much less stutter.
- Settings: Resolution scale was set to 100%.
- Notes: DX12 used for benchmarks, Defaulted to Native (2256x1504), no FSR, Mix of High/Epic Settings. Tuned down to low settings for subsequent runs. This game might just really not like the R5 hardware, as the R7 benchmark seems much much more playable. Lots of texture flickering/pop-in.
-
Game: Age of Empires II : Definitive Edition
- FPS: 35-50
- Score: 1223.9 (pass)
- Settings: All/Ultra
- Resolution: Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: HD Textures pack (not used for Gen 11 benchmark), Built in Benchmark.
3 Likes
I Re-ran this with a 100W power supply I have on hand as apparently it boosts performance on the R7 model.
- FPS: 1920x1080; Hyper-RX low
- Min: 34.74
- Avg: 42.74
- Max: 54.76
It appears that there is the smallest gain, ran this twice and had almost identical results. So, I suspect that ideally all of these scores go up with a beefier supply. I think that the “Final form” here will include thermal interface changes to round things up another few points.
Edit: I replaced the stock TIM with one of those honeywell pads and it decreased the scores in Cyberpunk. Replacing it again with Thermal Grizzly brought me in like with the scores from the non 100 watt supply while on the 100 watt supply. So, it appears that the stock thermal paste is no pushover on the AMD units.
Ptm and liquid metal still perform a lot better but the stock setup is already pretty alright, not sure if you got fake ptm or the install failed somehow but those results make no sense.
Yeah, I’m assuming that the PTM I picked up was not genuine. I didn’t have a problem testing it out even temporarily though as I had some paste on hand otherwise, no harm, no foul.
As for the rest of it, My best guess is that there is some variable in Win11 that I’m not accounting for somewhere. Additional processes in the background, the phase of the moon, something… I’m not used to getting worse results after repasting anything.
Maybe your paste is slightly worse than what was on there already or you got an air bubble or the mounting pressure is slightly off, there are a ton of variables.
Slightly lower benchmark scores with PTM were reported in the past, in the PTM thread. Here’s some discussion of that: [Honeywell PTM7950 Phase Change Thermal Pads/Sheets] Application, Tips, and Results - #104 by Michael_Wu
Not saying that’s what’s happening here, just for reference.
With the ridiculously good results I got I wonder if there is some thing weird going on, is there someone selling regular thermal pads as tpm? It is also somewhat easy to break the stuff while applying, and if you got a hole/bubble with no contact that’s gonna hurt.
Edit: or it could be the stapm weirdness, I did notice during my ptm testing that it can cool more than 30W but after some time stapm clamps down to 30, which is still more than what stock paste can cool but less than what ptm can cool and usually less than it can cool with a temp limit of 80 (the stapm only comes down over 80 it seems). I do wonder how high ptm can go but I only figured out how to deal with the power limits after I switched to lm and I’d rather not change back just to test that now.
Framework Specs: AMD 7640U, 2x16GB @ 5600MT/s CL40, Gen4 NVME, v3.05 UEFI.
Notes: Windows 11 Pro X64, Mainline AMD Driver (24.3.1, Hyper-RX Enabled globally) Plugged in (Official 60Watt), Best Performance power mode, iGPU Game mode set in UEFI
- Game: HellDivers 2
- FPS:
- Settings: Lowest, TAA
- Resolution: 1280x1024 “Native”; Hyper-RX to Native (2256x1504).
- Notes: Hyper-RX enabled, Tutorial Level, Seems workable honestly with an external mouse. I expect that on a bug planet with dozens of on-screen enemies will probably send it sub 30 FPS however. The Built in AA is TAA and is kinda needed IMO otherwise the edges are so sharp you’ll cut glass.
UPDATE: AMD Dropped the 24.4.1 Driver yesterday, and it specifically called out Hell Divers 2 as a performance target. With the same settings I am now bouncing between 42-47 in the tutorial level, bouncing off a max of 58 on the ship and in menus, and the lowest I saw it go was 35. So they’ve done some tweaking in our favor.
3 Likes
Hi again folks! Been a while, but it’s cool to see people still posting on this thread. I’m not sure if anyone has done these games yet, but I figured I may as well post some stuff.
Laptop specs: Ryzen 7 7840u, 2x8Gb ddr5 @4800mhz)
Deep Rock Galactic: ~50fps, medium preset, 1024x768
War Thunder: ~80fps, low preset, 2256x1504
Splitgate: ~90fps, medium preset, 2256x1504
Baulders Gate 3: After a while of playing around with settings and such, I couldnt get the game to run well enough without looking terrible. Probably doable with some optimization, but I decided I would rather just use my desktop so I could properly enjoy the game.
Also feel I should mention DRG wasn’t super consistant with FPS. I plan to test CS2 and TF2 more in depth, so I’ll probably post that soon.
1 Like
Dx11, or Dx12? Wondering if the RAM is the main culprit here. I would have expected you to get better performance with the 7840 over the 7640 with the better APU/iGPU onboard.
AMD 7640U, 2x16GB @ 5600MT/s CL40, AMD 24.5.1.
Spun it up on this end, 1920x1200 native, Medium settings I bounced between 40 and the 60 (Locked), remaining at 60 more often than not. Seems very workable, could probably get a solid lock on 60 FPS with some tuning.
After playing a bit more, I feel like its actually lower then what I posted above. 40-50 running around, 30 when fighting. DX version didnt seem to change much. Switching from windowed fullscreen to proper fullscreen did. Now getting about the same as what you reported.
1 Like
Framework Specs: AMD 7640U, 2x16GB @ 5600MT/s CL40, Gen4 NVME, v3.05 UEFI.
Notes: Windows 11 Pro X64, Mainline AMD Driver (24.5.1, Hyper-RX Enabled globally) Plugged in (Official 60Watt), Best Performance power mode, iGPU Game mode set in UEFI
- Game: Satisfactory (Update 8)
- FPS:
- Min: 20
- Max: 60 (locked)
- Avg: ~50
- Settings: Lowest available
- Resolution: 1680x1050; Hyper-RX to Native (2256x1504).
- Notes: This is testing with an “early game” factory (maybe 15 hours). There is quite a lot of dropped frames while assets in the immediate area load, once the area is loaded however movement is a pretty solid 50-60 FPS. I understand that this game gets a lot more demanding as time goes one due to the number of assets in place, so long term play is probably not in the cards. I suspect that a lower starting res, and careful planning may expand the ability further.
Update: Have a few more hours into this game, a new driver (25.6.1) with a LOT more sprawling, and assets on screen, I am very surprised with the performance. With the same settings, going into phase 4, I have seen a minimum of 40 FPS, a Max of 62, and an average hanging on at about 50. This is still very playable where I expected it to turn into a slideshow.
Very excited to say I ordered a Framework 16! Obviously the 13 inch isnt much of a gaming laptop, but I do think it would be fun to compare the 2 of them. Might throw in my desktop and make it a 3 way race.
1 Like
11th Gen, Linux. The only games I’ve had issues running are Counter Strike 2 and Dex. In Dex, the issue has to do with using a mouse with high polling rate and DPI, when I don’t move the mouse it’s perfect lol.
Thanks everyone for posting! I’m looking forward to some more benchmarks! I have a FW 13 Ryzen 7 7840U on order. It will have 32 GB Ram 5600. NVME and running Fedora Linux. I’m going to try some light gaming on it. My desktop can accomplish the heavy lifting. I am curious to see what it can do though. I’ve been looking all over for benchmarks on the 7840U in the Framework.
I can’t wait to for it to arrive! I’m batch 2, Q3. I think the new screen will be sweet! I’m super curious to see what this laptop will run! I’m hoping I can play some TES Oblivion and The Long Dark. Both are older games and both should run? Hopefully…
I’m also going to try (for benchmark sake) a few others. I was hoping Baulder’s Gate 3 would work (as it did on my Steam Deck), but it looked terrible on there. I’m assuming it will be the same on this chipset as it is about the same power.
Either way, share your benchmarks!
BG3 seems to run fine on mine, what problems did you have?
On my steam deck, it looked terrible! I was struggling to get 20 FPS with all settings on low and a resolution around 720p or something. I can’t remember. This was when it first came out. It may be more optimized now?
I’ve since sold off my SteamDeck as it didn’t meet my expectations. I think a V2 of this in another year or two will be epic though! I LOVED the hardware though and really like what Valve is doing with it!
EDIT: As a side note, I have found this video super helpful as a newer Linux user. I still haven’t tried to game on Linux but will be when my FW13 arrives.
The amd framework does have significantly more cpu and gpu horsepower than the steam-deck, though optimization probably helps too. BG3 is for the most part single core dependent and those zen4 cores do have quite a lot of that.
It’s pretty good recently, allmost everything just works these days, at least from the steam side.
1 Like
Heres a few games (not perfect tests because im stupid, but hopefully it gives some idea)
Framework 16, Ryzen 7 7840HS, 2x8Gb DDR5 5600, RX7700S, Windows 11
Red Dead Redemtion online: ~100 FPS, high settings (Vulkan), 2560x1600 with RSR
Helldivers 2: ~75 FPS, high settings, 2560x1600 with RSR
Deep Rock Galactic: ~165 FPS, high settings (dx12), 2560x1600 with FSR (preformance)
Notes: (Edited)
RDR Seems to very much care about the enviorment. Blackwater area was ~105, Valentine was about 80
DRG sometimes dips down to ~140, still feels very smooth
Im not very good at all this, but i’ll do my best to post my results when I feel like they’re worth posting. Spent a decent bit of time optimizing games and still learning how to do some stuff. Regardless, hope this threat still helps some people.
1 Like
As an update to this particular Benchmark, I have finished the game as far as one can at this time (About 145 hours in). My most densely packed assembly area brought the framerates down to 30-32 on the low and and only about 40 on the high end. Still impressive to me at least, this was performed with the same settings, but the driver has been updated.
New Benchmark Below:
Framework Specs: AMD 7640U, 2x16GB @ 5600MT/s CL40, Gen4 NVME, v3.05 UEFI.
Notes: Windows 11 Pro X64, Mainline AMD Driver (24.7.1, Hyper-RX Enabled globally) Plugged in (Official 60Watt), Best Performance power mode, iGPU Game mode set in UEFI
- Game: The Thaumaturge
- FPS:
- Min: 28
- Max: 40
- Avg: ~ 34
- Settings: “Steam Deck” these seem to bottom out most of the settings.
- Resolution: 1680x1050; Hyper_RX to Native (2256x1504)
- Notes: Testing performed in a few of the “outside” locations in Warsaw, there were frequent drops in performance when new assets load, and when particle effects are called. Combat was not tested during this benchmark, but I expect it to perform about in-line with the out and about performance if not a little better as there is less going on, on screen. If you can swing it, I suggest some level of AA as with the isometric view there is a LOT of shimmering on straight lines with the upscale tech enabled that can be distracting.
1 Like
