6 ms·
> AMD's memory latency is already better than the M1's. Apple's soldered RAM isn't a performance choice: Careful what you are comparing, in your examples the o
by adriancr 5y ago
> AMD's memory latency is already better than the M1's. Apple's soldered RAM isn't a performance choice:
Careful what you are comparing, in your examples the other CPU is also faster.
3950x is a desktop CPU and is faster then M1 -> https://gadgetversus.com/processor/apple-m1-vs-amd-ryzen-9-3950x/ https://gadgetversus.com/processor/apple-m1-vs-amd-ryzen-9-3...
5950x is even faster ->
https://gadgetversus.com/processor/apple-m1-vs-amd-ryzen-9-5950x/ https://gadgetversus.com/processor/apple-m1-vs-amd-ryzen-9-5...
Lower latencies are likely due to higher clock.
For equivalent laptop specific CPU, you will get a speedup from on-package RAM vs user replaceable RAM placed further away, even desktops would benefit but it would not be a welcome change there.
- kllrnohj 5y ago> Lower latencies are likely due to higher clock. That's not really how dram latency works. In basically all CPUs the memory controller runs at a different clock than the CPU cores do, typically at the same clock as the DRAM itself but not always. If you meant the dram was running faster on the AMD system then also no. The M1 is using 4266mhz modules while the AMD system was running 3200mhz ram > For equivalent laptop specific CPU, you will get a speedup from on-package RAM vs user replaceable RAM placed further away, even desktops would benefit but it would not be a welcome change there. Huge citation needed. There's currently no real world product that matches that claim nor a theoretical one as the physical trace length is minimal latency difference and far from the major factor.