3 ms·
There really isn't much of a perf difference between X86 and ARM these days. Generally CISC vs RISC argument this would devolve into but they all have instruct
by Sparkyte 3y ago
There really isn't much of a perf difference between X86 and ARM these days.
Generally CISC vs RISC argument this would devolve into but they all have instruction sets that either optimize performance or introduce ways to handle complex or reduced instructions in their own way.
RISC has only the benefit of being simple out of the box if designed that way and can have a lower power draw simply because. CISC is complex out of the box so it has more draw out of the box.
- deaddodo 3y ago> There really isn't much of a perf difference between X86 and ARM these days. We're not talking ISAs here or any sort of ideological argument regarding instruction set design. We're talking concrete architectural implementations. I linked specific benchmarks that show very real differences in a wide set of benchmarks. Particularly more generalized ones than the use cases the M-series is optimized for. If we take both companies' words to heart that their architectures recieved a 20% uplift, it would carry through that the gap would be similar today. Especially with the Ryzen 8000 around the corner, which is claimed/expected to have an even stronger single-core IPC uplift than 6000->7000.
- oyashirochama 3y ago5XXX, there was no 6XXX series, it was a rebrand of mixed Zen+ Zen 2 and Zen 3 cored CPUs. Bandwidth is the only real issue with AMD CPUs in comparison to Intel, and typically an advantage of Apple vs AMD though. Chiplet disadvantages vs monolithic design, much easier to perfect binning, much harder to get equal cross-core utilization.