What the two entries identify
Geekbench lists both processors as “Medusa Point 2/3”. The machines run Windows 11 Pro and report the same AMD identifier: family 26, model 224, stepping 0. Geekbench gives the exact part numbers for the samples. AMD has yet to announce which Ryzen names the two chips might go on sale under.
Geekbench 7.1.0 | Lenovo 22EQFVT006 | Lenovo 22EUFVT027 |
|---|---|---|
AMD sample | 100-000001658-50_Y | 100-000002152-50_Y |
Cores / threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16 |
Core clusters | 1 + 5 cores | 2 + 6 cores |
Total L2 / L3 cache | 6 / 4 MB | 8 / 8 MB |
Single-core score | 1 732 | 2 875 |
Multi-core score | 8 340 | 14 833 |
The two clusters are the groups the software detects. The table does not assign a specific architecture name to either. The same caution applies to product names. The shared identifier suggests the chips are related, but does not establish that AMD will sell these exact configurations.
Compilation and compression: the throughput behind the score
Geekbench breaks its index down by task. In the multi-core Clang compilation test, the six-core prototype processes 36,800 lines of code per second and the eight-core one 76,700. In asset compression, the same machines reach 251.5 and 484.7 MB/s respectively. The chart compares throughput within each task, as the two panels use different units.
One eight-core prototype, very different scores
The scores in the table come from the two entries linked below. VideoCardz spotted other runs for the eight-core model, ranging from 1,415 to 2,889 points in single-core and from 9,670 to 15,099 in multi-core. The software recorded a peak of 2.17 GHz in the first of those tests and 5.28 GHz in the second. These are observed clocks, not turbo specifications announced by AMD.
The two entries behind our chart illustrate the problem. Geekbench records a maximum of 2.04 GHz for the six-core chip and 5.28 GHz for the eight-core chip. Attributing the entire gap to the two extra cores would overlook that difference. These results describe two development machines and do not guarantee the same gain between future laptops.
An earlier sample listed with ten cores had a different identifier and 16 MB of L3 cache. Together, the three results shed light on the range of configurations in development, but do not yet rank future laptops at equivalent power or cooling.
Key takeaways
The clearest finding is that two distinct parts appear in Lenovo systems, each with an identifiable core count and cache configuration. Battery life, gaming performance and retail names remain unknown.