4 ms·

50% process technology. 25% for the fact that Apple can choose more expensive solutions in every turn. Better performance is often more expensive. 15% because

50% process technology. 25% for the fact that Apple can choose more expensive solutions in every turn. Better performance is often more expensive. 15% because Apple can design only for Apple products. Qualcomm, Intel, AMD .. have to design more generic products. ~10% at most for something else.

whynotminot 6y ago
Your math doesn't make sense. 25% because Apple chooses better solutions, and then you finish with only 10% better design? Is it only a better design if it's not more expensive? So you get to decide that? Does BMW not get credit for better design than a Ford Focus because it's more expensive? I guess it doesn't really matter. Apple makes a better product. That's kind of the story here at the end of the day.
zipityzi 6y ago
What are these numbers based on? Just your "best estimate"? It's dismissive of Apple's uarch for what reason? Arm has architecture licenses, unlike x86: anyone could've designed an Arm CPU from the ground up. NVIDIA tried, AMD tried, Intel tried, Qualcomm tried, Samsung tried, Huawei tried, etc. Everyone had a chance (and they still do). Arm is the most level playing field available in high-perf CPU design. And "50% process technology" is an exaggeration even embarrassing for HN. The A13 was built on 7nm and still beat perf/watt of any x86 CPU and total 1T performance rivals Tiger Lake. A14 / M1 are a natural evolution of that same uarch. https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16226/perf-trajectory.png https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16226/perf-trajectory.png What really breaks down your argument: Samsung has had nearly every advantage as Apple, yet its Exynos line is some of the worst-perf/watt Arm uarch today: its own OS (Tizen), its own foundry, its own phones / tablets / laptops, and a massive conglomerate for funding. What happen to Samsung? What money doesn't Samsung have? Hell, Samsung is even MORE integrated than Apple, as Apple still needs to outsource its fabrication to TSMC. There's a reason Samsung is giving up on its uarch and moving to Arm stock cores (X-1, A78, A78C, etc.), just like Qualcomm + NVIDIA. https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-announces-fourth-quarter-and-fy-2018-results https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-announce... Don't tell me "you need trillion dollar valuation to make a top-class CPU". AMD was nearly bankrupt 6 years ago and now has the fastest general compute x86 arch in the world. This argument reeks of "well, if Apple has the fastest CPU uarch today, then I'm going to ensure everyone else has an excuse." Apple didn't even have an Arm architectural license, much less a custom high-perf CPU, 13 years ago. 13 years from "never designed a high-perf CPU" to "dominating x86 perf / watt while at the heels of total perf" is actually notable and actually impressive.
- whynotminot 6y ago
  Well said. It's really disappointing that as Apple comes out with some of the most exciting processor designs we've ever seen, some look to dismiss the effort and make excuses for the other players that aren't producing. It can't possibly be that Apple is doing impressive, innovative work. No, it has to be some nebulous "other" thing that's really happening.
- Nokinside 6y ago
  Did you miss the fact that I attribute half for other than process technology. > The A13 was built on 7nm and still beat perf/watt of any x86 CPU We can directly compare Snapdragon 865 Plus and Apple A13 Bionic because they use the same process (N7P). 865 Plus is equal or better in most benchmarks.
  - whynotminot 6y ago
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/15982/the-asus-rog-phone-iii-review/3 https://www.anandtech.com/show/15982/the-asus-rog-phone-iii-... What in the world are you talking about? Anandtech shows the A13 handily besting a phone equipped with an 865+.
    - Nokinside 6y ago
      Most of those are not CPU tests. But even in the link you provided 865+ has best performance/watt in every test in GPU Performance & Power. Here is Nanoreview's Snapdragon 865 Plus vs A13 Bionic CPU performance tests: https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-compare/qualcomm-snapdragon-865-plus-vs-apple-a13-bionic https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-compare/qualcomm-snapdragon-86... (btw. My argument is not that Apple is worse)
      - whynotminot 6y ago
        JavaScript perf is a GPU test? I guess I'm learning new things every day. (The link I shared is all CPU leaning performance tests.) Nanoreview? Really dude? In the "Pro" section for the 865+ it lists two more cores (factual but largely irrelevant) and in the "Pro" section of the A13 it lists "Compatible with the latest DirectX 12.1" (laughably hilariously untrue). I love how nano review has become the Android fan bible, despite its very obvious flaws.

whynotminot 6y ago

Your math doesn't make sense. 25% because Apple chooses better solutions, and then you finish with only 10% better design? Is it only a better design if it's not more expensive? So you get to decide that? Does BMW not get credit for better design than a Ford Focus because it's more expensive? I guess it doesn't really matter. Apple makes a better product. That's kind of the story here at the end of the day.

zipityzi 6y ago

What are these numbers based on? Just your "best estimate"? It's dismissive of Apple's uarch for what reason? Arm has architecture licenses, unlike x86: anyone could've designed an Arm CPU from the ground up. NVIDIA tried, AMD tried, Intel tried, Qualcomm tried, Samsung tried, Huawei tried, etc. Everyone had a chance (and they still do). Arm is the most level playing field available in high-perf CPU design. And "50% process technology" is an exaggeration even embarrassing for HN. The A13 was built on 7nm and still beat perf/watt of any x86 CPU and total 1T performance rivals Tiger Lake. A14 / M1 are a natural evolution of that same uarch. https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16226/perf-trajectory.png https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16226/perf-trajectory.png What really breaks down your argument: Samsung has had nearly every advantage as Apple, yet its Exynos line is some of the worst-perf/watt Arm uarch today: its own OS (Tizen), its own foundry, its own phones / tablets / laptops, and a massive conglomerate for funding. What happen to Samsung? What money doesn't Samsung have? Hell, Samsung is even MORE integrated than Apple, as Apple still needs to outsource its fabrication to TSMC. There's a reason Samsung is giving up on its uarch and moving to Arm stock cores (X-1, A78, A78C, etc.), just like Qualcomm + NVIDIA. https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-announces-fourth-quarter-and-fy-2018-results https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-announce... Don't tell me "you need trillion dollar valuation to make a top-class CPU". AMD was nearly bankrupt 6 years ago and now has the fastest general compute x86 arch in the world. This argument reeks of "well, if Apple has the fastest CPU uarch today, then I'm going to ensure everyone else has an excuse." Apple didn't even have an Arm architectural license, much less a custom high-perf CPU, 13 years ago. 13 years from "never designed a high-perf CPU" to "dominating x86 perf / watt while at the heels of total perf" is actually notable and actually impressive.

whynotminot 6y ago
Well said. It's really disappointing that as Apple comes out with some of the most exciting processor designs we've ever seen, some look to dismiss the effort and make excuses for the other players that aren't producing. It can't possibly be that Apple is doing impressive, innovative work. No, it has to be some nebulous "other" thing that's really happening.
Nokinside 6y ago
Did you miss the fact that I attribute half for other than process technology. > The A13 was built on 7nm and still beat perf/watt of any x86 CPU We can directly compare Snapdragon 865 Plus and Apple A13 Bionic because they use the same process (N7P). 865 Plus is equal or better in most benchmarks.
- whynotminot 6y ago
  https://www.anandtech.com/show/15982/the-asus-rog-phone-iii-review/3 https://www.anandtech.com/show/15982/the-asus-rog-phone-iii-... What in the world are you talking about? Anandtech shows the A13 handily besting a phone equipped with an 865+.
  - Nokinside 6y ago
    Most of those are not CPU tests. But even in the link you provided 865+ has best performance/watt in every test in GPU Performance & Power. Here is Nanoreview's Snapdragon 865 Plus vs A13 Bionic CPU performance tests: https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-compare/qualcomm-snapdragon-865-plus-vs-apple-a13-bionic https://nanoreview.net/en/soc-compare/qualcomm-snapdragon-86... (btw. My argument is not that Apple is worse)
    - whynotminot 6y ago
      JavaScript perf is a GPU test? I guess I'm learning new things every day. (The link I shared is all CPU leaning performance tests.) Nanoreview? Really dude? In the "Pro" section for the 865+ it lists two more cores (factual but largely irrelevant) and in the "Pro" section of the A13 it lists "Compatible with the latest DirectX 12.1" (laughably hilariously untrue). I love how nano review has become the Android fan bible, despite its very obvious flaws.