3 ms·

Yes, your Xeon from 2013 example would be nowhere near the 2021 CPU from Apple. The outdated Xeon Apple had in their old laptops - a year behind everyone else,

Yes, your Xeon from 2013 example would be nowhere near the 2021 CPU from Apple. The outdated Xeon Apple had in their old laptops - a year behind everyone else, is also slower. The Xeon W-11955M however makes the M1 look like a kid's toy. In fact, if you remove 2 cores from that Xeon, you'll have my 6-core Xeon. Which also smokes that 10-core M1 in a bong. I'm also not sure why you're sarcastic about ECC RAM. I have 128GB of RAM in my laptop. If it wasn't ECC, I'd have crashes in my VMs and errors in my calculations. When you go 32GB+ and actually use the RAM, anything that doesn't support ECC cannot be taken seriously for professional use. Like the M1 Max.

paulmd 5y ago
The point is that a laptop Xeon from 2021 is also going to be the same as an 1185G7 or something similar - because they’re the same silicon. It’s not like you’re getting more silicon because it’s a Xeon, it’s not a server chip, it’s just a laptop chip with the enterprise features enabled. So, really no need to test them specifically. Go get an 1185G7 or something and you know what “Mobile Xeon” benches will look like. Anandtech already did those benches. https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph17024/117496.png https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph17024/117496.png
- soylentnewsorg 5y ago
  >enterprise features enabled Right. That's what a pro laptop is. 128G of ECC RAM so you don't get crashes and errors. 24MB of cache. Fast and solid. That's a workstation - we use those for work. But... Now you're saying the xeon I listed is the same as a 1 year old CPU, with half the cache of the Xeon, a lower clock, and half the core count. The mental gymnastics you have to perform are funny as hell to watch. Trump voter?
  - paulmd 5y ago
    Just to humor you I looked it up - your Xeon W-11955M is the same chip as a consumer 11980HK, which is one of the processors in Anandtech’s benchmark. Same cores, same cache, same clocks, slightly lower TDP limit - the consumer one has a 65W boost configuration. It is the same TGL-H die with (very slight) variations in what feature fuses are blown. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_CPUs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_... So based on Anandtech’s benchmark you can pretty much extrapolate how that is going to go - slightly lower performance and slightly higher efficiency due to TDP limiting clocks a bit, but same cache, same core configuration, etc mean that it’ll be identical to if you went into bios on a 11980HK and set a lower power limit. By the way the 11980HK is specifically the chip they called out the M1 Max as being a factor-of-6 more power efficient than. And in fact they said exactly what I just said - that limiting TDP will reduce performance on the 11955M and the perf/W gap will close a bit, but the performance gap will get even wider. > In multi-threaded tests, the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W active wall power, significantly more than what the MacBook Pro here is drawing. The performance levels of the M1 Max are significantly higher than the Intel chip here, due to the much better scalability of the cores. The perf/W differences here are 4-6x in favour of the M1 Max, all whilst posting significantly better performance, meaning the perf/W at ISO-perf would be even higher than this. https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performance-review/3 https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performanc... What’s your dealie, why so toxic?
    - soylentnewsorg 5y ago
      The m1 max TDP is projected to be 90W. The Xeon is 45W. https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max-should-approach-90w/ https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max... Now here's that Xeon beating that 11090HK. Hmm, same CPU according to you. Wonder why that is. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-Intel-Core-i9-11980HK/4419vs4355 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-... Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line.
      - paulmd 5y ago
        > Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line. I can tell, because you obviously didn’t read: > the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W at the wall Meanwhile the M1 max: > In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W So it’s over twice as fast (2.2X), at about 1/2 the power - hence Anandtech’s conclusion of “about 6x perf/watt”. It’s ok, you can still complain that obviously a higher clocked processor should have lower efficiency, and Anandtech addressed that too, in the very next sentence! > The performance levels of the M1 Max are significantly higher than the Intel chip here, due to the much better scalability of the cores. The perf/W differences here are 4-6x in favour of the M1 Max, all whilst posting significantly better performance, meaning the perf/W at ISO-perf would be even higher than this. Yep, that’s the picture. Lose by a factor of 2.2X in performance and by a factor of 2-3x in power consumption, or lose by a factor of 4 in performance (made up number but probably about right) at equal power. Apple is way out ahead here, far more than can be explained by “being a node ahead” or “using tighter pitches”. Their design is ahead.
        soylentnewsorg 5y ago
        Again, the Xeon is not the same CPU, is faster than the 11980HK, and has a lower TDP. What is it that you are not understanding here? Let me explain: the same CPU would have the same metrics. These two have different metrics. So they are not the same, because they are different. Does ya got it now?
threeseed 5y ago
> doesn't support ECC cannot be taken seriously for professional use. Like the M1 Max. M1X is using DDR5 which does have on-die ECC.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  Just being pedantic, DDR5's implementation of on-die ECC is still not equivalent to the implementation on CPUs. It doesn't account for errors that occur during processing, and there's still a pretty significant chance of corruption in L1-3 caches.
- soylentnewsorg 5y ago
  > on-die ECC which is not ECC RAM, results in bit errors, and is not used in a professional enterprise setting. thank you for agreeing with me. ECC RAM is not available on any Apple laptops. Which makes sense, because they are consumer laptops, not pro laptops. Me: the pipe bomb apple made in their garage is not a tomahawk missile. You: The pipebombs use explosives and can be thrown to hit remote targets - making them a tomahawk missle. You're like the guy saying the I9 is the same as a Xeon, with the only difference being "extra enterprise features" - which can be ignored, because because. Here in reality, you're doing mental gymnastics and stretching the facts to fit your feelings. like the guys putting horse dewormer in their butt to cure covid.
rsynnott 5y ago
> The outdated Xeon Apple had in their old laptops Apple has never sold a laptop with a Xeon in it.

paulmd 5y ago

The point is that a laptop Xeon from 2021 is also going to be the same as an 1185G7 or something similar - because they’re the same silicon. It’s not like you’re getting more silicon because it’s a Xeon, it’s not a server chip, it’s just a laptop chip with the enterprise features enabled. So, really no need to test them specifically. Go get an 1185G7 or something and you know what “Mobile Xeon” benches will look like. Anandtech already did those benches. https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph17024/117496.png https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph17024/117496.png

soylentnewsorg 5y ago
>enterprise features enabled Right. That's what a pro laptop is. 128G of ECC RAM so you don't get crashes and errors. 24MB of cache. Fast and solid. That's a workstation - we use those for work. But... Now you're saying the xeon I listed is the same as a 1 year old CPU, with half the cache of the Xeon, a lower clock, and half the core count. The mental gymnastics you have to perform are funny as hell to watch. Trump voter?
- paulmd 5y ago
  Just to humor you I looked it up - your Xeon W-11955M is the same chip as a consumer 11980HK, which is one of the processors in Anandtech’s benchmark. Same cores, same cache, same clocks, slightly lower TDP limit - the consumer one has a 65W boost configuration. It is the same TGL-H die with (very slight) variations in what feature fuses are blown. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_CPUs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_... So based on Anandtech’s benchmark you can pretty much extrapolate how that is going to go - slightly lower performance and slightly higher efficiency due to TDP limiting clocks a bit, but same cache, same core configuration, etc mean that it’ll be identical to if you went into bios on a 11980HK and set a lower power limit. By the way the 11980HK is specifically the chip they called out the M1 Max as being a factor-of-6 more power efficient than. And in fact they said exactly what I just said - that limiting TDP will reduce performance on the 11955M and the perf/W gap will close a bit, but the performance gap will get even wider. > In multi-threaded tests, the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W active wall power, significantly more than what the MacBook Pro here is drawing. The performance levels of the M1 Max are significantly higher than the Intel chip here, due to the much better scalability of the cores. The perf/W differences here are 4-6x in favour of the M1 Max, all whilst posting significantly better performance, meaning the perf/W at ISO-perf would be even higher than this. https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performance-review/3 https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performanc... What’s your dealie, why so toxic?
  - soylentnewsorg 5y ago
    The m1 max TDP is projected to be 90W. The Xeon is 45W. https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max-should-approach-90w/ https://newsbeezer.com/franceeng/the-tdp-of-the-apple-m1-max... Now here's that Xeon beating that 11090HK. Hmm, same CPU according to you. Wonder why that is. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-Intel-Core-i9-11980HK/4419vs4355 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-Xeon-W-11955M-vs-... Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line.
    - paulmd 5y ago
      > Sorry, I stopped reading after your first line. I can tell, because you obviously didn’t read: > the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W at the wall Meanwhile the M1 max: > In multi-threaded scenarios, the package and wall power vary from 34-43W on package, and wall active power from 40 to 62W So it’s over twice as fast (2.2X), at about 1/2 the power - hence Anandtech’s conclusion of “about 6x perf/watt”. It’s ok, you can still complain that obviously a higher clocked processor should have lower efficiency, and Anandtech addressed that too, in the very next sentence! > The performance levels of the M1 Max are significantly higher than the Intel chip here, due to the much better scalability of the cores. The perf/W differences here are 4-6x in favour of the M1 Max, all whilst posting significantly better performance, meaning the perf/W at ISO-perf would be even higher than this. Yep, that’s the picture. Lose by a factor of 2.2X in performance and by a factor of 2-3x in power consumption, or lose by a factor of 4 in performance (made up number but probably about right) at equal power. Apple is way out ahead here, far more than can be explained by “being a node ahead” or “using tighter pitches”. Their design is ahead.
      - soylentnewsorg 5y ago
        Again, the Xeon is not the same CPU, is faster than the 11980HK, and has a lower TDP. What is it that you are not understanding here? Let me explain: the same CPU would have the same metrics. These two have different metrics. So they are not the same, because they are different. Does ya got it now?

threeseed 5y ago

> doesn't support ECC cannot be taken seriously for professional use. Like the M1 Max. M1X is using DDR5 which does have on-die ECC.

smoldesu 5y ago
Just being pedantic, DDR5's implementation of on-die ECC is still not equivalent to the implementation on CPUs. It doesn't account for errors that occur during processing, and there's still a pretty significant chance of corruption in L1-3 caches.
soylentnewsorg 5y ago
> on-die ECC which is not ECC RAM, results in bit errors, and is not used in a professional enterprise setting. thank you for agreeing with me. ECC RAM is not available on any Apple laptops. Which makes sense, because they are consumer laptops, not pro laptops. Me: the pipe bomb apple made in their garage is not a tomahawk missile. You: The pipebombs use explosives and can be thrown to hit remote targets - making them a tomahawk missle. You're like the guy saying the I9 is the same as a Xeon, with the only difference being "extra enterprise features" - which can be ignored, because because. Here in reality, you're doing mental gymnastics and stretching the facts to fit your feelings. like the guys putting horse dewormer in their butt to cure covid.

rsynnott 5y ago

> The outdated Xeon Apple had in their old laptops Apple has never sold a laptop with a Xeon in it.