4 ms·

> Despite being ~1.5x bigger than the M4 Pro Where are you getting M4 die sizes from? It would hardly be surprising given the Max+ 395 has more, and on averag

> Despite being ~1.5x bigger than the M4 Pro Where are you getting M4 die sizes from? It would hardly be surprising given the Max+ 395 has more, and on average, better cores fabbed with 5nm unlike the M4's 3nm. Die size is mostly GPU though. Looking at some benchmarks: > slightly more MT. AMD's multicore passmark score is more than 40% higher. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/6345vs6403/Apple-M4-Pro-14-Core-vs-AMD-Ryzen-AI-Max+-395 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/6345vs6403/Apple-M4-Pro... > worse efficiency The AMD is an older fab process and does not have P/E cores. What are you measuring? > worse ST performance The P/E design choice gives different trade-offs e.g. AMD has much higher average single core perf. > worse GPU performance The AMD GPU: 14.8 TFLOPS vs. M4 Pro 9.2 TFLOPS. 19% higher 3D Mark 34% higher GeekBench 6 OpenCL Although a much crappier Blender score. I wonder what that's about. https://nanoreview.net/en/gpu-compare/radeon-8060s-vs-apple-m4-pro-gpu-20-core https://nanoreview.net/en/gpu-compare/radeon-8060s-vs-apple-...

aurareturn 1y ago
Where are you getting M4 die sizes from? M1 Pro is ~250mm2. M4 Pro likely increased in size a bit. So I estimated 300mm2. There are no official measurements but should be directionally correct. AMD's multicore passmark score is more than 40% higher. It's an out of date benchmark that not even AMD endorses and the industry does not use. Meanwhile, AMD officially endorses Cinebench 2024 and Geekbench. Let's use those. The AMD is an older fab process and does not have P/E cores. What are you measuring? Efficiency. Fab process does not account for the 3.65x efficiency deficit. N4 to N3 is roughly ~20-25% more efficient at the same speed. The P/E design choice gives different trade-offs e.g. AMD has much higher average single core perf. Citation needed. Further more, macOS uses P cores for all the important tasks and E cores for background tasks. I fail to see why even if AMD has a higher average ST would translate to better experience for users. 14.8 TFLOPS vs. M4 Pro 9.2 TFLOPS. TFLOPs are not the same between architectures. 19% higher 3D Mark Equal in 3DMark Wildlife, loses vs M4 Pro in Blender. 34% higher GeekBench 6 OpenCL OpenCL has long been deprecated on macOS. 105727 is the score for Metal, which is supported by macOS. 15% faster for M4 Pro. The GPUs themselves are roughly equal. However, Strix Halo is still a bigger SoC.
- Fluorescence 1y ago
  What a waste of time. "directionally correct"... so you don't know and made up some numbers? Great. AMD doesn't "endorse benchmarks" especially not fucking Geekbench for multi-core. No-one could because it's famously nonsense for higher core counts. AMD's decade old beef with Sysmark was about pro-Intel bias.
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    "directionally correct"... so you don't know and made up some numbers? Great. I never said it was exactly that size. Apple keeps the sizes of their base, Pro, and Max chips fairly consistent over generations. Welcome to the world of chip discussions. I've never taken apart and M4 Pro computer and measured the die myself. It appears no one has on the internet. However, we can infer a lot of it based on previously known facts. In this case, we know M1 Pro's die size is around 250mm2. AMD doesn't "endorse benchmarks" especially not fucking Geekbench for multi-core. No-one could because it's famously nonsense for higher core counts. AMD's decade old beef with Sysmark was about pro-Intel bias. Geekbench is the main benchmark AMD tends to use: https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-has-already-been-tested-with-geekbench-40-faster-than-5600x https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-has-already-be... The reason is because Geekbench correlates highly with SPEC, which is the industry standard.
    - Fluorescence 1y ago
      Their "main benchmark"? Stop making things up. It's no more than tragic fanboy addled fraud at this point. That three-year old press-release refers to SINGLE CORE Geekbench and not the defective multicore version that doesn't scale with core counts. Given AMD's main USP is core counts it would be an... unusual choice. AMD marketing uses every other product under the sun too (no doubt whatever gives the better looking numbers)... including Passmark e.g. it's on this Halo Strix page: https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/ai-pc-portfolio-leadership.html https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/ai-pc-portfolio-l... So I guess that means Passmark is "endorsed" by AMD too eh? Neat.

aurareturn 1y ago

Where are you getting M4 die sizes from? M1 Pro is ~250mm2. M4 Pro likely increased in size a bit. So I estimated 300mm2. There are no official measurements but should be directionally correct. AMD's multicore passmark score is more than 40% higher. It's an out of date benchmark that not even AMD endorses and the industry does not use. Meanwhile, AMD officially endorses Cinebench 2024 and Geekbench. Let's use those. The AMD is an older fab process and does not have P/E cores. What are you measuring? Efficiency. Fab process does not account for the 3.65x efficiency deficit. N4 to N3 is roughly ~20-25% more efficient at the same speed. The P/E design choice gives different trade-offs e.g. AMD has much higher average single core perf. Citation needed. Further more, macOS uses P cores for all the important tasks and E cores for background tasks. I fail to see why even if AMD has a higher average ST would translate to better experience for users. 14.8 TFLOPS vs. M4 Pro 9.2 TFLOPS. TFLOPs are not the same between architectures. 19% higher 3D Mark Equal in 3DMark Wildlife, loses vs M4 Pro in Blender. 34% higher GeekBench 6 OpenCL OpenCL has long been deprecated on macOS. 105727 is the score for Metal, which is supported by macOS. 15% faster for M4 Pro. The GPUs themselves are roughly equal. However, Strix Halo is still a bigger SoC.

Fluorescence 1y ago
What a waste of time. "directionally correct"... so you don't know and made up some numbers? Great. AMD doesn't "endorse benchmarks" especially not fucking Geekbench for multi-core. No-one could because it's famously nonsense for higher core counts. AMD's decade old beef with Sysmark was about pro-Intel bias.
- aurareturn 1y ago
  "directionally correct"... so you don't know and made up some numbers? Great. I never said it was exactly that size. Apple keeps the sizes of their base, Pro, and Max chips fairly consistent over generations. Welcome to the world of chip discussions. I've never taken apart and M4 Pro computer and measured the die myself. It appears no one has on the internet. However, we can infer a lot of it based on previously known facts. In this case, we know M1 Pro's die size is around 250mm2. AMD doesn't "endorse benchmarks" especially not fucking Geekbench for multi-core. No-one could because it's famously nonsense for higher core counts. AMD's decade old beef with Sysmark was about pro-Intel bias. Geekbench is the main benchmark AMD tends to use: https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-has-already-been-tested-with-geekbench-40-faster-than-5600x https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-ryzen-5-7600x-has-already-be... The reason is because Geekbench correlates highly with SPEC, which is the industry standard.
  - Fluorescence 1y ago
    Their "main benchmark"? Stop making things up. It's no more than tragic fanboy addled fraud at this point. That three-year old press-release refers to SINGLE CORE Geekbench and not the defective multicore version that doesn't scale with core counts. Given AMD's main USP is core counts it would be an... unusual choice. AMD marketing uses every other product under the sun too (no doubt whatever gives the better looking numbers)... including Passmark e.g. it's on this Halo Strix page: https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/ai-pc-portfolio-leadership.html https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/ai-pc-portfolio-l... So I guess that means Passmark is "endorsed" by AMD too eh? Neat.