> Being 30% faster is the easy part. Being 30% within the same thermal behavior is the hard part. Yeah, but I'd argue it isn't heat, but power consumption that

> Being 30% faster is the easy part. Being 30% within the same thermal behavior is the hard part. Yeah, but I'd argue it isn't heat, but power consumption that matters (understanding that heat/power use are directly related). The Apple M processors aren't about top performance, they are about top performance/watt. I'd love to see intel/amd pull off the magic required to bring x86 into comparable perf/watt with apple silicon, but I wont hold my breath. This smacks of marketing to try to redefine the metric of competition back to raw performance. Reminds me of the Hz wars.