4 ms·

The report you quoted and linked to is about the A15 and not the M2. The M2 is based on the A15 but from what I've seen it does use quite a bit more power (~30%

by eis 4y ago

The report you quoted and linked to is about the A15 and not the M2. The M2 is based on the A15 but from what I've seen it does use quite a bit more power (~30%?) than the M1 when loaded. Anandtech did not analyze the M2 yet as far as I can see.

GeekyBear 4y ago
As previously noted, those core designs are used in both the A15 and the M2. Just as the same cores were used in the A14 and M1. Using more power overall comes from adding additional GPU cores and other non-CPU core functionality.
- eis 4y ago
  If the increase in power consumption comes from the additional GPU core, from increased frequencies in the CPU cores or other added parts to the chip imho is not that important for users (and depends on what they are doing). They see the system as a whole. They get x% more performance for y% more power usage. For the CPU x is smaller than y. This is totally normal when increasing frequencies. Note: I'm not saying the M2 is bad. It's a very good chip indeed. All I said was it was not amazing. It was an iterational, yet welcome, improvement. And I think one couldn't expect anything amazing quite so quickly.
  - GeekyBear 4y ago
    We're talking about CPU core design. Would we say the Zen 4 core design is less efficient because AMD is going to start bundling an integrated GPU with Ryzen chips, or would we just talk about Zen 4 core power draw vs Zen 3? Apple's performance cores managed to improve performance while cutting power. What other iterative core design did this? It helps to remember that Apple isn't playing the performance via clock increases no matter what happens to power and heat game.
    - eis 4y ago
      I guess that's where the misunderstanding comes from. I was not talking about CPU cores alone. Only M1, M2 as a whole. But I still am not sure if I can believe that the M2 CPU improved performance while at the same time cutting power. Can you link to some analysis? Would be very interesting. Though please not the A15 one, the cores are related but not the same and the CPUs have big differences.
      - Maursault 4y ago
        Apple hardware updates are always and only moderate incremental improvements, since the very beginning. Apple is reasonably predictable in this regard. It is unrealistic to expect a generational and exponential leap in performance or efficiency in any of Apple's hardware refreshes. That has never happened, and it likely never will. What happens instead is whatever model gets a little bit better than the last revision. The M1 was not a massive leap forward, but instead an impressive lateral move. Subsequent Apple Silicon chips will only be a smidgen better than the newest previous revision.
  - eric-hu 4y ago
    > And I think one couldn't expect anything amazing quite so quickly. I'm not expecting to see such a performance jump from another CPU transition again in my lifetime. The jump from x86 to M1 was a boost because of TSMC's fab process compared to Intel's, yes, but it was also from the ISA change, leaving behind a lot of the x86 cruft.
- rowanG077 4y ago
  So how do you explain the M2 13 inch mbp throttling severely under load while the M1 13 inch mbp doesn't as heavily. It's the same chassis. It's impossible for the M2 to use less power, the heat has to come from somewhere. It's not the GPU since many benchmark use a CPU only load to show throttling behaviour.

by eis 4y ago

GeekyBear 4y ago

As previously noted, those core designs are used in both the A15 and the M2. Just as the same cores were used in the A14 and M1. Using more power overall comes from adding additional GPU cores and other non-CPU core functionality.

eis 4y ago
If the increase in power consumption comes from the additional GPU core, from increased frequencies in the CPU cores or other added parts to the chip imho is not that important for users (and depends on what they are doing). They see the system as a whole. They get x% more performance for y% more power usage. For the CPU x is smaller than y. This is totally normal when increasing frequencies. Note: I'm not saying the M2 is bad. It's a very good chip indeed. All I said was it was not amazing. It was an iterational, yet welcome, improvement. And I think one couldn't expect anything amazing quite so quickly.
- GeekyBear 4y ago
  We're talking about CPU core design. Would we say the Zen 4 core design is less efficient because AMD is going to start bundling an integrated GPU with Ryzen chips, or would we just talk about Zen 4 core power draw vs Zen 3? Apple's performance cores managed to improve performance while cutting power. What other iterative core design did this? It helps to remember that Apple isn't playing the performance via clock increases no matter what happens to power and heat game.
  - eis 4y ago
    I guess that's where the misunderstanding comes from. I was not talking about CPU cores alone. Only M1, M2 as a whole. But I still am not sure if I can believe that the M2 CPU improved performance while at the same time cutting power. Can you link to some analysis? Would be very interesting. Though please not the A15 one, the cores are related but not the same and the CPUs have big differences.
    - Maursault 4y ago
      Apple hardware updates are always and only moderate incremental improvements, since the very beginning. Apple is reasonably predictable in this regard. It is unrealistic to expect a generational and exponential leap in performance or efficiency in any of Apple's hardware refreshes. That has never happened, and it likely never will. What happens instead is whatever model gets a little bit better than the last revision. The M1 was not a massive leap forward, but instead an impressive lateral move. Subsequent Apple Silicon chips will only be a smidgen better than the newest previous revision.
- eric-hu 4y ago
  > And I think one couldn't expect anything amazing quite so quickly. I'm not expecting to see such a performance jump from another CPU transition again in my lifetime. The jump from x86 to M1 was a boost because of TSMC's fab process compared to Intel's, yes, but it was also from the ISA change, leaving behind a lot of the x86 cruft.
rowanG077 4y ago
So how do you explain the M2 13 inch mbp throttling severely under load while the M1 13 inch mbp doesn't as heavily. It's the same chassis. It's impossible for the M2 to use less power, the heat has to come from somewhere. It's not the GPU since many benchmark use a CPU only load to show throttling behaviour.