> I wish AMD would add more cache for faster speed and lower energy consumption There's a trade-off: a bigger cache means a higher latency. According to https:

> I wish AMD would add more cache for faster speed and lower energy consumption There's a trade-off: a bigger cache means a higher latency. According to https://twitter.com/chiakokhua/status/1564413952108335105 https://twitter.com/chiakokhua/status/1564413952108335105 this doubling of the L2 cache already caused an increase of 2 cycles of latency. > Ryzen L1 32/32 > M1/M2 L1 192/128 This is a consequence of Apple using a 16kiB page size, while the x86 world is stuck with a 4kiB page size. For technical reasons (the L1 lookup runs before or in parallel with the virtual to physical address translation), the L1 cache can only be indexed by the bits which don't change between virtual and physical addresses (that is, the bits representing the offset within the page), making it hard to increase the L1 cache size while keeping its latency low (and a low latency is very important in the L1 cache). I don't know the latency for the Apple L2 caches, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's higher than the latency for the Intel and AMD L2 caches; having a larger L1 cache would mean Apple can afford to have a higher latency to the L2.