4 ms·
The 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 perf
by tssva 3y ago
The 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.
- kergonath 3y ago> Many benchmarks today actually do measure these things Except, of course, for chips that are not available yet, such as those discussed here.
- rsynnott 3y agoSure, and when the chip is available and that test can be done independently, that’ll largely answer the question. For now, it’s pretty much just marketing claims.
- ollien 3y agoI don't have a citation on hand (though I love GamersNexus, their focus on video makes it hard to find citations for such things), iirc TDP is actually not comparable between processor generations, let alone manufacturers. Intel and AMD calculate it differently, and AMD's calculation includes the thermal solution attached to the chip, so hypothetically they can make it almost whatever number they want.
- olliej 3y agoRight, that was the first thing I looked at and I don’t understand the article author’s logic: compare performance to M2, then don’t compare the 25% lower power (admittedly stated) consumption. Just a super weird writing choice. Also puts to bed the “x86 is fundamentally unable to be as low power as arm” rationale for the poor intel and amd perf/watt. I think the sole reason for that is that they never _really_ competed on that metric.