4 ms·

I don't think these efficiencies are just from the node advantage. The fact is that Apple chips follow mobile designs and are highly integrated SoCs where Apple

by uluyol 5y ago

I don't think these efficiencies are just from the node advantage. The fact is that Apple chips follow mobile designs and are highly integrated SoCs where Apple can optimize every aspect of the system in exchange for losing flexibility (no mixing and matching of components). In contrast to mobile processors, x86 processors live in a world where flexibility is demanded. I need to be able to pick how much RAM I want, which WIFI modem, which graphics, and so on (where I is a combination of the consumer and laptop manufacturer). Sure, laptop processors have gotten more integrated lately, but it's not to the same degree. Competition from Apple might pressure Intel and AMD to integrate much more and sacrifice this flexibility in order to squeeze out better power efficiencies.

cududa 5y ago
As a teenager in 2005/ 2006, had an obsession with overclocking AMD Opteron 165's. DFI motherboards allowed you to set the ratios for FSB/HTT, LDT/FSB, CPU/FSB, etc. I'd hunt like crazy for specific OCZ DDR2 RAM modules from specific batches that had the tolerances I was looking for. At a few points, had the highest perf overclocks (even among liquid cooling - mine was passive with a polished heatsink) on various leaderboards and my 4GB DDR2 system frequently could beat out 8GB DDR3 systems (with full stability via MemTest x86) on GeekBench like tests. WRT Apple Silicon I think about those days a lot - just thinking about the perf AMD, OCZ, and DFI could have repeatedly squeezed out if they all were one company setting the same tolerances on all silicon and power delivery. I have to imagine a large amount of the perf wins come from having consistent FSB, HTT, and LDT channels that can have the channel relay ratios optimally configured instead of buffering up the "lowest common denominator" silicon manufacturing tolerances.
garbagecoder 5y ago
This thread is just total cope.

by uluyol 5y ago

cududa 5y ago

As a teenager in 2005/ 2006, had an obsession with overclocking AMD Opteron 165's. DFI motherboards allowed you to set the ratios for FSB/HTT, LDT/FSB, CPU/FSB, etc. I'd hunt like crazy for specific OCZ DDR2 RAM modules from specific batches that had the tolerances I was looking for. At a few points, had the highest perf overclocks (even among liquid cooling - mine was passive with a polished heatsink) on various leaderboards and my 4GB DDR2 system frequently could beat out 8GB DDR3 systems (with full stability via MemTest x86) on GeekBench like tests. WRT Apple Silicon I think about those days a lot - just thinking about the perf AMD, OCZ, and DFI could have repeatedly squeezed out if they all were one company setting the same tolerances on all silicon and power delivery. I have to imagine a large amount of the perf wins come from having consistent FSB, HTT, and LDT channels that can have the channel relay ratios optimally configured instead of buffering up the "lowest common denominator" silicon manufacturing tolerances.

garbagecoder 5y ago

This thread is just total cope.