3 ms·
The focus on node size conveniently elides that this is a comparison between a 14 core CPU and an 8 core CPU.
by pram 5y ago
The focus on node size conveniently elides that this is a comparison between a 14 core CPU and an 8 core CPU.
- smoldesu 5y agoHow is that relevant, though? Even the M1 Max gets smoked by an i5 in single-core performance, and stands neck-and-neck in multicore. In a "fair" fight, Intel still takes the performance crown home. Density is relevant because the only argument I hear from M1 pundits is about performance-per-watt, which is only achieved through monopolizing the 5nm supply chain. When Intel is standing neck-and-neck on power draw with significantly higher clock speeds, single-core performance and IO bandwith, Apple's chips are going to lose their luster. Plus, it's not like you need to use ARM to compete with that efficiency. Just 2 years ago AMD was shipping Ryzen laptop chips (like the 4800u) with similar x86 performance at a similar price point in a similar power envelope. How'd they do it? They designed it with 7nm lithography. It's not magic, just the obvious benefits of using the latest technology.
- pram 5y agoNo, the M1 Max beats the same processor in the article (i7-1280P) in Cinebench multicore: ~12365 to 11480. That is a 10 core M1 Max vs the 14 core i7. Your "fair fight" is just moving the goal posts to some other random non-specified (probably non-laptop) processor.
- Avamander 5y agoA fair fight in this case, laptops, is one that takes dissipated heat and cooling into account. Intel might beat the previous generation of their competitors, but at what cost, absolutely impractical in reality. Scorchingly hot or noisy as hell, with poor battery life. It's not magic and Intel is losing in a lot of aspects.