3 ms·
> There is no way that the A14 (nor the M1) is going to be faster in any raw performance category than a latest generation and top-spec desktop system. Well, n
by dev_tty01 6y ago
> There is no way that the A14 (nor the M1) is going to be faster in any raw performance category than a latest generation and top-spec desktop system.
Well, no point in arguing here. You may be right, but the machines will be in the hands of users next week. It would be stupid for Apple to make those claims if they weren't true. We'll see soon enough.
Assuming the claims are true, we shouldn't forget that Intel per core performance improvements have been incremental at best for several years. They've really run into some major problems with their fab process development in recent years. TSMC (Apple Silicon foundry) is well ahead. It has been kind of hard to watch since that has historically been such a strength for Intel. They're a strong company, they'll get it together.
- oblio 6y agoApple is the company that was cherry picking benchmarks for YEARS as PowerPC was being crushed by Intel. Apple has been making false or at least misleading claims forever. Not all of them, mind you, but you need a boulder of salt.
- fomine3 6y agoTo be fair, all consumer chip companies' PR is hype-ish. Anyway we should wait for independent benchmark rather than official Ad.
- snowwrestler 6y agoPowerPC chips had some advantages over Intel, which was why they were used to create supercomputers for a while, and were picked to power the first Xbox. PowerPC’s biggest flaw was power efficiency, a situation which became critical as Apple’s sales skewed toward laptops. The G5 was a beast but it ate power like a beast too; it was never going to work in a laptop, and so Apple had to switch.
- noisem4ker 6y agoIt's the Xbox 360 which had a PowerPC CPU, named Xenon. The first one used a standard Intel x86 chip.