3 ms·
That doesn’t look apples-to-apples to me. That’s thousands of samples of a two year old low-end M1 vs 2 samples of a brand new Ryzen mid-range (AFAICT). (And th
by KerrAvon 4y ago
That doesn’t look apples-to-apples to me. That’s thousands of samples of a two year old low-end M1 vs 2 samples of a brand new Ryzen mid-range (AFAICT). (And the Ryzen still loses at single core performance.)
- jeswin 4y ago1. AMD just got to 5nm, and hence this is more apples-to-apples if we're talking about design efficiency (rather than TSMC's capabilities) 2. The brand new M2s are only about 20% faster, so the results are still valid.
- userbinator 4y agoMissed opportunity to call it apples-to-Apples ;-) But I do wonder, given the other comments here about TDP and these days of thermally-limited performance, what the results are if both are locked to the same constant frequency.
- ElectricalUnion 4y agoNah, besides crazy speculative behaviour, automatic overcloking is how modern chips are so fast compared to a few years ago. And usually for battery power, it's often better to run really hot for a small ammount of time, that to run for a extended ammount of time at lower clocks.
- heavyset_go 4y agoIt's an apples-to-apples comparison when it comes to the node process. AMD's latest CPUs are made on 5nm and 4nm nodes, something that Apple was only able to do with the M1/M2 because they booked all of TSMC's 5nm node capacity. It's only recently that other companies like AMD are able to use TSMC's 5nm node process.