3 ms·
I do think M2 is more power efficient, but it seems close enough to me. The Thinkpad in real usecase testing has very good battery life, 15 hours etc doing regu
by KaoruAoiShiho 4y ago
I do think M2 is more power efficient, but it seems close enough to me. The Thinkpad in real usecase testing has very good battery life, 15 hours etc doing regular work. I just don't have the perspective that the fact it can scale up in power should be held against it. It's pretty typical when you're doing some super computationally expensive processing to be plugged while it's the casual emails etc that has to have great battery life.
> Comparing the lowest end chip from one vendor to the highest end chip from another is not exactly a great look.
Is it anyone else's fault that Apple only has one sku. The M2 is a 20 billion transistor chip while the Rembrandt is a 13 billion transistor chip. I'd argue that the M2 is higher end one. The laptops MBA/Thinkpad compared are the same price.
> Especially when the Arm chip is basically matching the x86 one while having only a few years of software optimization work.
So we agree it matches lol? That's what I was arguing for. Nowhere did I say Apple sucks. I default to using Apple products and have been for almost all my life. I was just trying to make a case that x86 is good enough too hardware wise.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]