3 ms·

I don't think that's true. M3 has much better idle/near-idle power draw, but actual performance per watt when doing things is pretty close.

• aurareturn 2y ago
  No, it’s the other way around. Intel has generally caught up in idle power draw but is still severely behind in performance per watt. https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Lunar-Lake-CPU-analysis-The-Core-Ultra-7-258V-s-multi-core-performance-is-disappointing-but-its-everyday-efficiency-is-good.893405.0.html https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Lunar-Lake-CPU-analysis-... https://youtu.be/ymoiWv9BF7Q https://youtu.be/ymoiWv9BF7Q
  • hedora 2y ago
    The last I checked, there low wattage AMD and high wattage Apple had similar performance and wattage, so AMD was the right choice for raw performance, and Apple won for portable devices. Intel was losing badly to one or the other at all TDPs. I don’t get the impression that’s changed much. (Even if it has, I can’t remember the last time I encountered a non-xeon intel machine with working hardware and drivers (for any OS, and I tried Windows, Linux and macs).
    • aurareturn 2y ago
      AMD does not win over Apple for raw portal performance. AMD does give you a lot of MT performance for a decent price. You have to buy an M3 Pro to match an AMD HX 370. However, you’re sacrificing battery life, quietness, portability, and ST performance with AMD.
    • Brybry 2y ago
      Remember that the latest Intel chips are a TSMC process node now, that's a pretty big change.