6 ms·
How will this compare per watt? The Apple M-series is 3x more performant per watt than anything else. Perf Per Watt (bigger is better): M1 298 M
by tiffanyh 3y ago
How will this compare per watt?
The Apple M-series is 3x more performant per watt than anything else.
Perf Per Watt (bigger is better):
M1 298
M2 297
AMD 5600U 90
AMD 6800U 78
Intel 1240P 64
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-M2-SoC-Analysis-Worse-CPU-efficiency-compared-to-the-M1.637834.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-M2-SoC-Analysis-Worse-CP...
- out_of_protocol 3y agoM1 value seems wrong, should be 407 Different test: Cinebench R23 Multi Package Power Efficiency M1 - 561 pts/watt M2 - 433 AMD Ryzen 7 6800U - 374 Intel Core i5-1240P - 258
- jml7c5 3y agoThose are the "multi package" numbers. Though exactly what "single" vs "multi" means in this context is unclear to me.
- wtallis 3y ago"Cinebench R23 Multi" and "Cinebench R23 Single" are the software workloads used (multi-thread and single-thread). "Package Power" specifies (approximately) where the power is measured and what components are included—but reviewers like NotebookCheck aren't equipped to actually measure power at the chip or package level, so they're actually relying on software estimates that add another layer of vendor-specific sources of error on top of the inconsistencies about what's in the package (eg. Apple puts DRAM in the package but Intel and AMD don't).
- senttoschool 3y agoCinebench uses Intel Embree, which is library that is hand optimized for x86 instructions. It should not be used to compare ARM vs x86 CPUS. Geekbench is better here.
- binkHN 3y agoFor those just reading the comments, the article mentions the 7000 series chips and the numbers here reflect the prior generation.
- brokenmachine 3y agoWhat are the numbers for the 7000 chips on this list?
- AtlasBarfed 3y agoM1/M2 is a big.little design isn't it? As in an ultra low power CPU for trivial tasks and it spins up heavyweight cores when the workload demands it? I mean, 3x the performance per watt might be --lies-- --damn lies-- uh, benchmarks targeting the little CPU?
- dragonwriter 3y ago> M1/M2 is a big.little design isn’t it? Isn’t almost everything designed for consumer use, even the Intel i9, these days?
- astrange 3y agoAMD isn't.
- wmf 3y agoThis is a reasonable guess but I don't think it's correct. Most benchmarks appear to compare P-cores vs. P-cores.
- astrange 3y agoWhat's the point of an efficiency benchmark that only compares P-cores?
- tssva 3y agoThe tdp for the m2 is 20 watts. The article mentions a 15 watt tdp for the AMD chip. We will have to wait to see when the chips are released but it appears performance per watt will be at a minimum competitive with the m2.
- rsynnott 3y agoI’d maintain a certain amount of scepticism until independent benchmarks are out. Comparison by tdp, particularly between manufacturers, tends to be… less than useful; if nothing else there is no common definition of tdp. As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, there was an Intel chip that appeared to beat the M1 on performance per watt if you looked at ‘tdp’, the issue being that Intel was using a particularly eccentric definition of tdp.
- dist-epoch 3y agoMany motherboards now report the power (Watts) drawn by the CPU. If you don't trust that, you can always measure the whole system usage at the plug.
- kergonath 3y agoBy then you can run your own benchmarks, which was the point of “until independent benchmarks are out”. You need some skepticism when discussing characteristics they give for an upcoming chip.
- dist-epoch 3y agoMany benchmarks today actually do measure these things. It could be improved through.
- rsynnott 3y agoThe point is, fundamentally, that you shouldn't take a manufacturer's word on real-world behaviour, particularly for something that isn't even released yet. Like, you can if you want, but going on history you will nearly always be disappointed.
- AshamedCaptain 3y agoIf you cite notebookcheck, at least cite the article where they compare a processor of the same gen... https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Ryzen-9-7940HS-analysis-Zen4-Phoenix-is-ideally-as-efficient-as-Apple.713395.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Ryzen-9-7940HS-analysis-Ze... TLDR: The performance per watt gap is gone, but only when you compare at similar TDPs.
- tfdvydhh 3y agoNice try, apple fanboy. Your number are for the prevoius gen.
- taylodl 3y agoAnd performance per watt is what (ha!) matters most on a laptop as users demand both - high performance and a long battery life.