4 ms·
This is such a bizarre article. First, they say superiority claims were right all along, and then paragraph after paragraph they reveal worse single core perfor
by frankjr 3y ago
This is such a bizarre article. First, they say superiority claims were right all along, and then paragraph after paragraph they reveal worse single core performance, worse multi core performance (needs 4 more cores to gain 16% advantage), higher power draw, and to finish it off they mention that Geekbench is not really a great benchmark.
- dogma1138 3y agoNot only 4 more cores but the QC chip has 12 performance cores rather than the 4+4 setup of the M3. So 50% in total core advantage and 200% when it comes to high performance cores only for 16% multi-threaded lead is hardly an advantage. Ofc there are caveats to this if QC’s performance cores are closer to Apple’s efficiency cores in terms of size and power consumption then it’s a different story. But that doesn’t seem to be the case. The other major caveat is that QC has so far only been demoing its SoCs on devboards which don’t share the same power and thermal restrictions as real world designs. Whilst the M3 figures are for real world hardware. So squeezing the Snapdragon Elite into a MacBook Air style form factor might paint a very different picture.
- The_Colonel 3y agoApple performance cores are very big in terms of area, you can't just compare the numbers. I think it comes down to performance / watt / area, while single core performance is also important.