> The M4 Pro continues to be manufactured using a 3-nm process and on the old M3 Pro (27-28 watts), we measured a lower consumption than on the M2 Pro models (~

> The M4 Pro continues to be manufactured using a 3-nm process and on the old M3 Pro (27-28 watts), we measured a lower consumption than on the M2 Pro models (~36 watts), despite its improved performance. In contrast [...] the new M4 Pro can consume up to 46 watts, settling at around 40 watts during the further course—so at its peak, it consumes 60% more. Assuming they refer to the full chips rather than the binned ones, each generation of pro chips has the following number of p and e cores: | Model | # p-cores | # e-cores | |--------|-----------|-----------| | M2 Pro | 8 | 4 | | M3 Pro | 6 | 6 | | M4 Pro | 10 | 4 | Thus m3 pro has more e-cores and less p-cores than m2 pro thus the big increase in efficiency, while the m4 pro has more p-cores than m2 pro thus the increase. It is all about tradeoffs and, honestly, the result is pretty much expected when you count the cores. I assume there is some improvement per generation, but if the number of cores is not constant, the latter is gonna drive most of the variance generation to generation.