4 ms·

The M3 Max scores higher on GB6 than the 7950X, full stop: https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/

The M3 Max scores higher on GB6 than the 7950X, full stop: https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x I'm also not sure what you mean by 7950x having a lower TDP than the M3 Max. Even in eco mode, the 7950x has a TDP of 65W, vs the M3 Max's 45W: https://www.anandtech.com/show/17585/amd-zen-4-ryzen-9-7950x-and-ryzen-5-7600x-review-retaking-the-high-end/20 https://www.anandtech.com/show/17585/amd-zen-4-ryzen-9-7950x...

jeswin 3y ago
> The M3 Max scores higher on GB6 than the 7950X, full stop: https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x As you can see in this list [1], there are several systems which exceed 21k. The 19k scores are mostly stock systems with no tuning (for example, RAM at 3200Mhz, stock fan etc). The Macs would have been carefully tuned, so it's only fair that you'd do so on assembled kits. I haven't tested Eco mode myself, but from what i've read performance drops by 10-20% depending on the configuration (105w vs 65w). Still in the ballpark. Add: and 7950X3D would do even better. [1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7950x https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7950x
- etchalon 3y ago
  Yes, if you overclock the 7590x, ignoring any "system tuning" you can get a better GB6. If we could overclock the M3 Max, we could achieve the same. The performance loss of the 7590X in 65W eco mode isn't 10-20% compared to stock. It's more like 20-30%: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6aKQ-eBFk0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6aKQ-eBFk0 If we use an overlocked 7590X – ignored the additional power draw – in 65W eco mode, using a rounded up 22K GB6 score, and assume a 20% performance loss (~17600 GB6), the 7950X, at 40% higher TDP than the M3 Max, is still 10% slower than the M3 Max. Which is especially insane considering the 7950X is a desktop-class CPU, and the M3 Max is sitting in a laptop.
  - jeswin 3y ago
    Since we agree on the non-linear relationship between TDP and benchmark scores, can we also agree that further reduction in power (to say 45w) would only cause a small drop in performance? For argument's sake, let's triple the 10% to 30% and also assume that TDP = avg power draw during the benchmark. The 5nm 7950x is then 30% slower than 3nm M3 Max. My original argument was that Apple's advantage is mostly just TSMC. > Which is especially insane considering the 7950X is a desktop-class CPU, and the M3 Max is sitting in a laptop. 7945HX3D is a 5nm 55W laptop part, and it scores 15-16k on GB6.
    - Sparkyte 3y ago
      Next year is going to be SEXY!
    - etchalon 3y ago
      You haven't proven your argument then, and it shouldn't be a hard one to prove, as the 7940 and Apple's M2 Max both exist. AMD's 7940 used TSMC's 4nm FinFET while the M2 used their older 5nm process. And yet: https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7940hs https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7940hs https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=M2+Max https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=M2+Max So, even when AMD has a process advantage over Apple (however slight), Apple still wins.
      - jeswin 3y ago
        1) M2 uses N5P. N4 has little advantage over N5P. 2) 7950HS is 35-54w. You'll see several results above/around 14k.
        etchalon 3y ago
        1. Little, or none, and it's as close as a comparison as possible, and why it'd be useful to prove your "It's all TSMC!" point, yet fails to. 2. … and there are M2 Max results above/around 15k.
    - wtallis 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Sparkyte 3y ago
https://browser.geekbench.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=7945HX3D https://browser.geekbench.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=7945HX... Check this out, this processor is a 55-64 watt variant of the 7900X3D for mobile use. It's neck and neck.
- wtallis 3y ago
  The 7945HX3D is a mobile version of the 7950X3D (not 7900X3D), but the only way to consider it a 64W CPU is to ignore the power used by the IO die—and a CPU isn't much use without a memory controller. Don't mistake a long-term sustained power limit that OEMs can freely adjust for an actual power consumption measurement, especially when discussing a benchmark that only does short bursts of work.
- etchalon 3y ago
  I don't know that'd call a 15-20% performance difference "neck and neck".
  - Sparkyte 3y ago
    7945HX3D is a M2 competitor though. 8K series is around the corner now.
    - wtallis 3y ago
      > 8K series is around the corner now. If they were going to announce Zen 5 high-end mobile parts at CES in January 2024, they would have launched Zen 5 desktop parts by now (because the high-end -HX mobile parts are literally the desktop silicon put into a BGA package instead of LGA). A successor to the 7945HX3D can't be much less than a year away, meaning the 7945HX3D is less than halfway through its product lifecycle.
      - Sparkyte 3y ago
        Actually their standard mobile lineup comes first. Then desktop or if the gains are just a small step they skip and go to premium laptop. So it goes standard laptop -> desktop -> premium laptop. That is how AMD has released chips for the past six years.

jeswin 3y ago

> The M3 Max scores higher on GB6 than the 7950X, full stop: https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-9-7950x As you can see in this list [1], there are several systems which exceed 21k. The 19k scores are mostly stock systems with no tuning (for example, RAM at 3200Mhz, stock fan etc). The Macs would have been carefully tuned, so it's only fair that you'd do so on assembled kits. I haven't tested Eco mode myself, but from what i've read performance drops by 10-20% depending on the configuration (105w vs 65w). Still in the ballpark. Add: and 7950X3D would do even better. [1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7950x https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7950x

etchalon 3y ago
Yes, if you overclock the 7590x, ignoring any "system tuning" you can get a better GB6. If we could overclock the M3 Max, we could achieve the same. The performance loss of the 7590X in 65W eco mode isn't 10-20% compared to stock. It's more like 20-30%: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6aKQ-eBFk0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6aKQ-eBFk0 If we use an overlocked 7590X – ignored the additional power draw – in 65W eco mode, using a rounded up 22K GB6 score, and assume a 20% performance loss (~17600 GB6), the 7950X, at 40% higher TDP than the M3 Max, is still 10% slower than the M3 Max. Which is especially insane considering the 7950X is a desktop-class CPU, and the M3 Max is sitting in a laptop.
- jeswin 3y ago
  Since we agree on the non-linear relationship between TDP and benchmark scores, can we also agree that further reduction in power (to say 45w) would only cause a small drop in performance? For argument's sake, let's triple the 10% to 30% and also assume that TDP = avg power draw during the benchmark. The 5nm 7950x is then 30% slower than 3nm M3 Max. My original argument was that Apple's advantage is mostly just TSMC. > Which is especially insane considering the 7950X is a desktop-class CPU, and the M3 Max is sitting in a laptop. 7945HX3D is a 5nm 55W laptop part, and it scores 15-16k on GB6.
  - Sparkyte 3y ago
    Next year is going to be SEXY!
  - etchalon 3y ago
    You haven't proven your argument then, and it shouldn't be a hard one to prove, as the 7940 and Apple's M2 Max both exist. AMD's 7940 used TSMC's 4nm FinFET while the M2 used their older 5nm process. And yet: https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7940hs https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=7940hs https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=M2+Max https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=M2+Max So, even when AMD has a process advantage over Apple (however slight), Apple still wins.
    - jeswin 3y ago
      1) M2 uses N5P. N4 has little advantage over N5P. 2) 7950HS is 35-54w. You'll see several results above/around 14k.
      - etchalon 3y ago
        1. Little, or none, and it's as close as a comparison as possible, and why it'd be useful to prove your "It's all TSMC!" point, yet fails to. 2. … and there are M2 Max results above/around 15k.
  - wtallis 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Sparkyte 3y ago

https://browser.geekbench.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=7945HX3D https://browser.geekbench.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=7945HX... Check this out, this processor is a 55-64 watt variant of the 7900X3D for mobile use. It's neck and neck.

wtallis 3y ago
The 7945HX3D is a mobile version of the 7950X3D (not 7900X3D), but the only way to consider it a 64W CPU is to ignore the power used by the IO die—and a CPU isn't much use without a memory controller. Don't mistake a long-term sustained power limit that OEMs can freely adjust for an actual power consumption measurement, especially when discussing a benchmark that only does short bursts of work.
etchalon 3y ago
I don't know that'd call a 15-20% performance difference "neck and neck".
- Sparkyte 3y ago
  7945HX3D is a M2 competitor though. 8K series is around the corner now.
  - wtallis 3y ago
    > 8K series is around the corner now. If they were going to announce Zen 5 high-end mobile parts at CES in January 2024, they would have launched Zen 5 desktop parts by now (because the high-end -HX mobile parts are literally the desktop silicon put into a BGA package instead of LGA). A successor to the 7945HX3D can't be much less than a year away, meaning the 7945HX3D is less than halfway through its product lifecycle.
    - Sparkyte 3y ago
      Actually their standard mobile lineup comes first. Then desktop or if the gains are just a small step they skip and go to premium laptop. So it goes standard laptop -> desktop -> premium laptop. That is how AMD has released chips for the past six years.