3 ms·
Yeah. When the article compares what Apple is doing to Intel, I think they mean “classic Intel processors of years ago” that didn’t frequency scale. Like the nu
by MBCook 2y ago
Yeah. When the article compares what Apple is doing to Intel, I think they mean “classic Intel processors of years ago” that didn’t frequency scale. Like the numbered Pentiums, IIRC. That did stand out to me a little bit.
You’re right that everyone has been doing this for quite a while, it’s certainly not an Apple invention.
The Electric Light Company often covers Mac stuff and Activity Monitor is the tool you use to view this stuff in OS X, so it’s just the domain this article is focusing on.
- eastern 2y agoIt's not as if they don't know that this is a false comparison, specially because generations of Intel CPUs used in Macs also did frequency throttling. "Unlike traditional Intel CPUs, CPU cores in Apple silicon chips can be run at a wide range of frequencies, as set by macOS." The use of the word 'traditional' here is essentially gaslighting.
- MBCook 2y agoI don’t think so. Like I said, I think it’s referring to much older generations. It just seems like awkward phrasing.