mjtomlin
About
- Username
- mjtomlin
- Joined
- Visits
- 192
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 4,861
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 2,699
Reactions
-
Apple uses Messages colors to bully Android users, says Google
The BIGGEST difference (and arguably the most important), between the blue and green bubbles… is that it shows which messages are end to end encrypted and which are not. All blue bubbles are encrypted. Green are not.
-
Intel's Alder Lake chips are very powerful, and that's good for the entire industry
crowley said:
Meh, Apple's vague charts aren't all that much better. I think it's a given that the marketing will emphasise strengths and downplay or outright omit weaknesses. No sense in criticising Intel any more than anyone else.mjtomlin said:crowley said:
If you believe the chart, it shows the i9-12900HK with better performance per watt than the M1 Max in the 30-35W range. Real world comparisons I don't know about, we'll need to wait for benchmarks.Xed said:
You're saying that Intel's 12-gen mobile processors will have a better performance per watt in real world comparisons?crowley said:
I don't think that's true. They are fairly competitive in performance per watt. What they haven't yet mastered is low-power performance. But this is the first Intel generation to embrace a big.LITTLE-type architecture, and it shows a marked improvement. They're getting there.Xed said:
Not out as in filing for bankruptcy? Obviously not. That may never happen in our lifetime, but they are clearly out in terms of performance per watt. PPW is extremely important. There's a reason why Intel Atom isn't a real contender in the smartphone market and why Apple was able to scale up their mobile chip development to compete with Intel's performance at a faction of the power draw.crowley said:Many were very eager to write off Intel. They were down, but they're certainly not out.
If you believe they merely have to "get back up" to have the fastest chip for a given PPW, how exactly do you think that's possible with the current path forward? I certainly don't see it.
So, they were down, but they're not out. And they also have Arc coming. So not yet a write off.
You know… It is really telling that Intel chose a single metric to base this claim on; a CPU “copy” throughput metric that may not have any significance on how the rest of the CPU performs.
Has nothing to do with vague charts… has everything to do with using a single metric (which is just one of a dozen in a suite of SPECrate benchmarks) as a basis to make a bold claim of overall performance. Most benchmark suites give individual test scores and an overall score. Why do they do this, because specific optimizations can be made that enhance performance in one area, but may degrade performance in another. So where’s the overall SPECrate score?
-
Intel's Alder Lake chips are very powerful, and that's good for the entire industry
crowley said:
If you believe the chart, it shows the i9-12900HK with better performance per watt than the M1 Max in the 30-35W range. Real world comparisons I don't know about, we'll need to wait for benchmarks.Xed said:
You're saying that Intel's 12-gen mobile processors will have a better performance per watt in real world comparisons?crowley said:
I don't think that's true. They are fairly competitive in performance per watt. What they haven't yet mastered is low-power performance. But this is the first Intel generation to embrace a big.LITTLE-type architecture, and it shows a marked improvement. They're getting there.Xed said:
Not out as in filing for bankruptcy? Obviously not. That may never happen in our lifetime, but they are clearly out in terms of performance per watt. PPW is extremely important. There's a reason why Intel Atom isn't a real contender in the smartphone market and why Apple was able to scale up their mobile chip development to compete with Intel's performance at a faction of the power draw.crowley said:Many were very eager to write off Intel. They were down, but they're certainly not out.
If you believe they merely have to "get back up" to have the fastest chip for a given PPW, how exactly do you think that's possible with the current path forward? I certainly don't see it.
So, they were down, but they're not out. And they also have Arc coming. So not yet a write off.
You know… It is really telling that Intel chose a single metric to base this claim on; a CPU “copy” throughput metric that may not have any significance on how the rest of the CPU performs. Especially since x86 CPUs are hamstrung by their variable width instructions and decoders. Even AMD has admitted to this as a huge limitation that there is no work around for.
And hasn’t Intel been caught with their pants down before with pre-release CPU benchmarking?
-
Intel's Alder Lake chips are very powerful, and that's good for the entire industry
rob53 said:
Actually, I thought I heard the M1 Pro and Max were totally redesigned.mjtomlin said:That chart (and claim) is based on a single metric from a dozen benchmarks as part of the SPECrate 2017 tests. Need to wait and see about real world tests.
Let’s also not forget, the M1 CPU cores are almost 18 months old now. Intel would be severely embarrassed if they didn’t have ANYTHING to show.
One last note, when your “mobile” CPU performance drops by 55% when the device is not plugged in… you basically failed.
The SoC is a completely different design than the M1. (Think of the Pro/Max as the M1X.) But the CPU cores (as well as most others) are the same.
-
Intel's Alder Lake chips are very powerful, and that's good for the entire industry
DuhSesame said:This is gotta be fun. I should throw some more facts to add some fuel /s
1. The M1 Max by cinebench r23 is about 30% slower to 12700H;
2. M2 by report only offer a modest performer boost.
3. The 2-die Max Duo, supposedly used by the iMac Pro, is estimated to be ~26000, by comparison, the 12900K offers ~27000.
The only advantage for Apple Silicon on paper seems to just be the power efficiency. According to Anandtech, M1 uses roughly 17 watts when running cb23, slightly lower to the 20-24 watt maximum.
Have fun, and remember, Think Different /s.
Congrats… you just pointed out the main reason Apple ditched Intel. Apple isn’t reaching for massive GPCPU performance. They are clearly more interested in overall system performance and efficiency by incorporating more and more coprocessors to offload tasks to.
Furthermore, comparing a brand new CPU with one that’s about 18 months old is a rather lame attempt at demonstrating how “powerful” your new cores are.
