3 ms·
>I don't think you've actually looked at the benchmarks. What benchmarks? Geekbench? That's the only one I've ever seen where the fight is close, and Geekbench
by asdginionio 9y ago
>I don't think you've actually looked at the benchmarks.
What benchmarks? Geekbench? That's the only one I've ever seen where the fight is close, and Geekbench (like everything that boils performance down to one number) is nearly completely useless.
If you see a two-watt phone CPU beating a 45-watt actively-cooled laptop CPU, you can either conclude that the phone is alien technology decades ahead of anything else on the market or that the benchmark is broken. Which is more likely?
https://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=136526&curpostid=136666 https://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=136526&curpost...
- throwahey 9y agoDoes Linus not realize that Intel processors also have hardware assisted SHA? Geekbench may not be the best tool for determining the power of a processor, but at the least it gives you a general idea of power across devices in a consistent set of tests, which can be extrapolated.
- asdginionio 9y agoThey didn't at the time he wrote that. That post is pretty outdated. It's about old hardware and an old version of Geekbench. But people still use Geekbench 3 and old x86 hardware, so it's not totally irrelevant.
- dannyw 9y agoWe are talking about the MacBook, IE passively cooled Intel Core m3 running at 1.2 GHz on something like 8 Watts TDP.