3 ms·

How much of the improved efficiency is really ARM vs Intel and how much is that the new Apple silicon will now be TWO cycles ahead of Intel in miniaturisation.

How much of the improved efficiency is really ARM vs Intel and how much is that the new Apple silicon will now be TWO cycles ahead of Intel in miniaturisation. That must count for something too.

tux1968 6y ago
The point is not that Intel can't do it, it's that Intel hasn't done it.
- jonplackett 6y ago
  It kinda seems like they also can’t.
jcheng 6y ago
You can look at AMD CPUs if you want an apples-to-apples comparison, as theirs are on the same TSMC nodes as Apple.
- GeekyBear 6y ago
  AMD is going to go with an enhanced version of TSMC's 7nm process for their next round of CPUs. Apple will be using TSMC's new 5nm process for the first version of it's laptop class chips, so they will have a process node advantage in the upcoming generation.
  - jonplackett 6y ago
    I guess we could compare AMD's new chips with Apple's old ones and see how that looks.
    - GeekyBear 6y ago
      The A13 in Apple's iPhone is on the same TSMC process node as AMD's current chiplets and compares quite favorably despite a greatly reduced power budget and a lack of active cooling. >Last year I’ve noted that the A12 was margins off the best desktop CPU cores. This year, the A13 has essentially matched best that AMD and Intel have to offer – in SPECint2006 at least. In SPECfp2006 the A13 is still roughly 15% behind. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro-and-max-review/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro...
      - imtringued 6y ago
        The Apple core runs at 5W. Consider that AMD's chips run at significantly higher clock rates. The power budget isn't greatly reduced. It's basically the same. Apple has little room for improvement. They have to stay below 2.4Ghz to keep the same power budget. Just read the article you linked. >Apple’s marketing materials describe the A13 as being 20% faster along with also stating that it uses 30% less power than the A12, which unfortunately is phrased in a deceiving (or at least unclear) manner. While we suspect that a lot of people will interpret it to mean that A13 is 20% faster while simultaneously using 30% less power, it’s actually either one or the other.
        GeekyBear 6y ago
        I did read it. That 5 watt figure is with one of the two big cores fully loaded. AMD idles with a bigger power draw than that. >In the face-off against a Cortex-A55 implementation such as on the Snapdragon 855, the new Thunder cores represent a 2.5-3x performance lead while at the same time using less than half the energy. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro-and-max-review/2 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro... When compared to other designs that operate under the same cooling and power constraints, there is absolutely no competition.

How much of the improved efficiency is really ARM vs Intel and how much is that the new Apple silicon will now be TWO cycles ahead of Intel in miniaturisation. That must count for something too.

tux1968 6y ago

The point is not that Intel can't do it, it's that Intel hasn't done it.

jonplackett 6y ago
It kinda seems like they also can’t.

jcheng 6y ago

You can look at AMD CPUs if you want an apples-to-apples comparison, as theirs are on the same TSMC nodes as Apple.

GeekyBear 6y ago
AMD is going to go with an enhanced version of TSMC's 7nm process for their next round of CPUs. Apple will be using TSMC's new 5nm process for the first version of it's laptop class chips, so they will have a process node advantage in the upcoming generation.
- jonplackett 6y ago
  I guess we could compare AMD's new chips with Apple's old ones and see how that looks.
  - GeekyBear 6y ago
    The A13 in Apple's iPhone is on the same TSMC process node as AMD's current chiplets and compares quite favorably despite a greatly reduced power budget and a lack of active cooling. >Last year I’ve noted that the A12 was margins off the best desktop CPU cores. This year, the A13 has essentially matched best that AMD and Intel have to offer – in SPECint2006 at least. In SPECfp2006 the A13 is still roughly 15% behind. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro-and-max-review/4 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro...
    - imtringued 6y ago
      The Apple core runs at 5W. Consider that AMD's chips run at significantly higher clock rates. The power budget isn't greatly reduced. It's basically the same. Apple has little room for improvement. They have to stay below 2.4Ghz to keep the same power budget. Just read the article you linked. >Apple’s marketing materials describe the A13 as being 20% faster along with also stating that it uses 30% less power than the A12, which unfortunately is phrased in a deceiving (or at least unclear) manner. While we suspect that a lot of people will interpret it to mean that A13 is 20% faster while simultaneously using 30% less power, it’s actually either one or the other.
      - GeekyBear 6y ago
        I did read it. That 5 watt figure is with one of the two big cores fully loaded. AMD idles with a bigger power draw than that. >In the face-off against a Cortex-A55 implementation such as on the Snapdragon 855, the new Thunder cores represent a 2.5-3x performance lead while at the same time using less than half the energy. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro-and-max-review/2 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro... When compared to other designs that operate under the same cooling and power constraints, there is absolutely no competition.