4 ms·

> All of Apple's M chips so far have been primarily designed for mobile use There, you said it again. This is wrong - you hear Apple M chip and you think "lapt

> All of Apple's M chips so far have been primarily designed for mobile use There, you said it again. This is wrong - you hear Apple M chip and you think "laptop" primarily, but that is no longer true. Just as it would be to say ARM is primarily for smartphones. Now I don't want to talk about sales numbers, but the M chips in the Apple Studio and Mac Pro (and those used by other manufacturers in servers) are a different category than "laptop". For a quick shallow impression see: https://nanoreview.net/en/cpu-compare/intel-core-i9-14900k-vs-apple-m2-ultra https://nanoreview.net/en/cpu-compare/intel-core-i9-14900k-v... (nevermind it's the i9-14900K) Again, the I9 is more powerful, but that doesn't make all of ARM or M a "laptop".

Dylan16807 3y ago
> the M chips in the Apple Studio and Mac Pro (and those used by other manufacturers in servers) are a different category than "laptop". The M2 ultra is basically two M2 Maxs stuck together. It's the same chip that's in laptops, and was designed around a laptop power budget. In what way is it in a different category? Designing for different power targets has a significant effect on power and performance metrics. When a chip is designed to be able to take tons of watts, that hurts its efficiency even when you're currently running at a low wattage. So comparing chips with different wattage philosophies gets tricky.