4 ms·

Hm, I'm surprised by that statement. The Ryzen 5000 mobile CPUs were a lot faster than the Intel competition and I am pretty sure Apple does not have them in an

by onli 6y ago

Hm, I'm surprised by that statement. The Ryzen 5000 mobile CPUs were a lot faster than the Intel competition and I am pretty sure Apple does not have them in any laptop. And the very fast SSD is a new addition, isn't it? Did I miss something?

klelatti 6y ago
You implied that they only saw a difference because Apple wasn't using "modern processors". You can't exclude everything but Zen 3 from any sensible definition of "modern processor".
- onli 6y ago
  The parent comment talked about the implications he thought this had about the architecture. Like half of the thread seemingly ignoring that a) there are x86 processors that are more than competitive and b) that the big leap he described is more likely coming from the faster storage and from comparing it with the very much older and weaker processors most people that bought an upgrade now had in their old laptops. Heck, he might have used an old dual core with an HDD from all we know. Of course the new M1 models would make a big difference then. So would all other modern laptops. But in that context of x86 and ARM Zen3 is absolutely the only sound comparison.
  - klelatti 6y ago
    I know what you're trying to say is that you have to do a comparison of CPUs built on similar process nodes - and that maybe the parent has overstated the x86 vs Arm comparison. I would have some sympathy with that - but that's not the same as discounting the parent's perspective because Apple somehow weren't using "modern processors" previously - because that simply isn't true.
    - onli 6y ago
      Similar process nodes, or at least when making general statements of the architecture to compare the best modern candidates. Otherwise you just can't make statements about the architecture based on that. And Apple just does not have Zen 3 laptops (unsurprisingly), so there is that. And I still think it's very valid to not forget how old hardware used for subjective comparisons will be. E.g. the old Macbook air sold very well all that time.
  - api 6y ago
    Are there any x86 processors that are competitive in performance / watt?
    - onli 6y ago
      The processors that come closest are the Zen 3 processors. They beat the M1 in total performance, see https://www.pcworld.com/article/3604597/apple-m1-vs-ryzen-5000-macbook-pro-and-asus-rog-flow-x13-compared.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/3604597/apple-m1-vs-ryzen-50..., but are made for a higher watt usage. There is no direct performance/watt comparison I am aware of. It's likely the M1 is better in that category, but it does not look like a huge difference if you factor in the higher performance you get from the Ryzen 9 5980HS.
      - klelatti 6y ago
        Single core Ryzen 7 5800U Geekbench scores are c20% lower than M1. Multi core better but still lower but not too surprised as it's got 8 large cores vs big.LITTLE 4/4 for M1 - not clear when those cores will start throttling down. Suspect single core performance is what drives apparent responsiveness so I'd say not too surprising that the M1 gets rave reviews from users.

by onli 6y ago

klelatti 6y ago

You implied that they only saw a difference because Apple wasn't using "modern processors". You can't exclude everything but Zen 3 from any sensible definition of "modern processor".

onli 6y ago
The parent comment talked about the implications he thought this had about the architecture. Like half of the thread seemingly ignoring that a) there are x86 processors that are more than competitive and b) that the big leap he described is more likely coming from the faster storage and from comparing it with the very much older and weaker processors most people that bought an upgrade now had in their old laptops. Heck, he might have used an old dual core with an HDD from all we know. Of course the new M1 models would make a big difference then. So would all other modern laptops. But in that context of x86 and ARM Zen3 is absolutely the only sound comparison.
- klelatti 6y ago
  I know what you're trying to say is that you have to do a comparison of CPUs built on similar process nodes - and that maybe the parent has overstated the x86 vs Arm comparison. I would have some sympathy with that - but that's not the same as discounting the parent's perspective because Apple somehow weren't using "modern processors" previously - because that simply isn't true.
  - onli 6y ago
    Similar process nodes, or at least when making general statements of the architecture to compare the best modern candidates. Otherwise you just can't make statements about the architecture based on that. And Apple just does not have Zen 3 laptops (unsurprisingly), so there is that. And I still think it's very valid to not forget how old hardware used for subjective comparisons will be. E.g. the old Macbook air sold very well all that time.
- api 6y ago
  Are there any x86 processors that are competitive in performance / watt?
  - onli 6y ago
    The processors that come closest are the Zen 3 processors. They beat the M1 in total performance, see https://www.pcworld.com/article/3604597/apple-m1-vs-ryzen-5000-macbook-pro-and-asus-rog-flow-x13-compared.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/3604597/apple-m1-vs-ryzen-50..., but are made for a higher watt usage. There is no direct performance/watt comparison I am aware of. It's likely the M1 is better in that category, but it does not look like a huge difference if you factor in the higher performance you get from the Ryzen 9 5980HS.
    - klelatti 6y ago
      Single core Ryzen 7 5800U Geekbench scores are c20% lower than M1. Multi core better but still lower but not too surprised as it's got 8 large cores vs big.LITTLE 4/4 for M1 - not clear when those cores will start throttling down. Suspect single core performance is what drives apparent responsiveness so I'd say not too surprising that the M1 gets rave reviews from users.