4 ms·

Live by benchmark results and slick performance marketing, die by benchmark results and slick performance marketing. The market is ruthless; if you aren't deli

by ajross 3y ago

Live by benchmark results and slick performance marketing, die by benchmark results and slick performance marketing. The market is ruthless; if you aren't delivering more of what you promised made you great last year, you're failing. Really the underlying news here, which the article doesn't really treat with, is that TSMC's 3nm node is sort of a bust. It's not looking like a full node upgrade at all (something that's been reasonably clear for a few months based on the leaked pitch/density numbers). They still have a comfortable lead over Intel, but scaling limitations come for us all eventually.

WoodenChair 3y ago
> They still have a comfortable lead over Intel, but scaling limitations come for us all eventually. We’ll see if that holds. Intel claims they are on track to launch “Intel 20A” in 2024. [0] 0: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-displays-arrow-lake-wafer-with-20a-process-node-chips-arrive-in-2024 https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-displays-arrow-lake-...
- mdasen 3y ago
  At this point, Intel's roadmap seems unreasonably optimistic. They haven't launched processors with Intel 4 yet. They're set to be released December 14th, but we aren't seeing Intel launch a full line of processors with Intel 4. If Intel 4 is coming in December 2023 in a very limited way, are we really expecting 20A in 2024? I'd love for Intel's roadmap to be real, but it just doesn't seem likely. I guess it also depends on what you mean by "in 2024". For example, Intel 4 came to us "in Q3 2022"[1], but we aren't seeing any processors until 17 months later. If Intel 20A comes to us "in Q3 2024", but we don't see any processors out until December 2025, that's a big difference. It's an especially big difference if it means that it's in processors in December 2025 in a very limited way. TSMC's 3nm tech is shipping in Apple Silicon CPUs at high volume. Intel seems to say "Intel 20A Q3 2024", but that isn't when we get CPUs with that tech. Maybe it's when their teams can create limited volume samples? Realistically, it seems like there's 18+ months between Intel's roadmap and the CPUs getting into something you can buy. Again, I'd love Intel's roadmap to be accurate, but if Intel 4 started "in Q3 2022" and we're getting limited laptops with it in December 2023 or January 2024, that seems like Intel saying that they've gotten to a point well before they can actually get that into our hands. [1] https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-roadmap-2025-explainer/ https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-roadmap-2025-explainer/
starcraft2wol 3y ago
It’s a bust in its first round? As others have pointed out, maintaining performance with less power is an improvement.
vardump 3y ago
I'd say gains from M2 Max to M3 Max are pretty reasonable. Of course same might not apply to M2 Pro to M3 Pro.
- runeks 3y ago
  > I'd say gains from M2 Max to M3 Max are pretty reasonable. How are they reasonable to you? As I see it, they just added 50% more (performance) cores to the M3 Max compared to the M2 Max (12 versus 8, respectively) and achieved 50% higher multi-core performance: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/3434546?baseline=3434549 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/3434546?baselin.... No rocket science here. If anything, we should be asking “why only +50% for multi-core performance when single core performance increased by ~20%?”.

by ajross 3y ago

WoodenChair 3y ago

> They still have a comfortable lead over Intel, but scaling limitations come for us all eventually. We’ll see if that holds. Intel claims they are on track to launch “Intel 20A” in 2024. [0] 0: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-displays-arrow-lake-wafer-with-20a-process-node-chips-arrive-in-2024 https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-displays-arrow-lake-...

mdasen 3y ago
At this point, Intel's roadmap seems unreasonably optimistic. They haven't launched processors with Intel 4 yet. They're set to be released December 14th, but we aren't seeing Intel launch a full line of processors with Intel 4. If Intel 4 is coming in December 2023 in a very limited way, are we really expecting 20A in 2024? I'd love for Intel's roadmap to be real, but it just doesn't seem likely. I guess it also depends on what you mean by "in 2024". For example, Intel 4 came to us "in Q3 2022"[1], but we aren't seeing any processors until 17 months later. If Intel 20A comes to us "in Q3 2024", but we don't see any processors out until December 2025, that's a big difference. It's an especially big difference if it means that it's in processors in December 2025 in a very limited way. TSMC's 3nm tech is shipping in Apple Silicon CPUs at high volume. Intel seems to say "Intel 20A Q3 2024", but that isn't when we get CPUs with that tech. Maybe it's when their teams can create limited volume samples? Realistically, it seems like there's 18+ months between Intel's roadmap and the CPUs getting into something you can buy. Again, I'd love Intel's roadmap to be accurate, but if Intel 4 started "in Q3 2022" and we're getting limited laptops with it in December 2023 or January 2024, that seems like Intel saying that they've gotten to a point well before they can actually get that into our hands. [1] https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-roadmap-2025-explainer/ https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-roadmap-2025-explainer/

starcraft2wol 3y ago

It’s a bust in its first round? As others have pointed out, maintaining performance with less power is an improvement.

vardump 3y ago

I'd say gains from M2 Max to M3 Max are pretty reasonable. Of course same might not apply to M2 Pro to M3 Pro.

runeks 3y ago
> I'd say gains from M2 Max to M3 Max are pretty reasonable. How are they reasonable to you? As I see it, they just added 50% more (performance) cores to the M3 Max compared to the M2 Max (12 versus 8, respectively) and achieved 50% higher multi-core performance: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/3434546?baseline=3434549 https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/3434546?baselin.... No rocket science here. If anything, we should be asking “why only +50% for multi-core performance when single core performance increased by ~20%?”.