Hacker News Reader

Comment by philwelch | Hacker News Reader

> Apple is winning now not because of "ARMness" but because TSMC pulled ahead of Intel on density and power/performance.

AMD’s processors are also fabricated by TSMC; why aren’t they competitive with Apple?

View on HN

I have a M1 Max and a AMD Ryzen Pro 5750GE (35W) - they are competitive, in fact on most things the 5750GE is slightly faster.

Aren't they? I recently read some comparison between the latest Ryzen 7840U and Z1 vs the Apple M2, and the Ryzens were significantly faster at the same TDP.

And that is without getting into the high-end segment, where Apple doesn't have anything that can compete with the Threadrippers and Epycs.

Is this true in anything besides cinebench? It’s always cinebench I see cited and that’s possibly the most useless efficiency figure available (bulk FPU tasks with no front end load is stuff that should be done on gpu, largely, CFD and other HPC workloads aside).

How does it do in JVM efficiency (IDE) or GCC (chrome compile) efficiency? How does it do in openFOAM efficiency?

But it’s always cinebench.

> openFOAM

That's a name I don't see every day. Good to know more people are using it. :)

Not on the same processes they aren't, no. Zen 3 is on 7nm. Apple is shipping chips on 5nm, and has reportedly bought up the entire fab production schedule of 3nm for the next year for a to-be-announced product.

Again, everything comes down to process. ISA isn't important.

That yet to be announced product is the iPhone 15 Pro, for the record.

iPhone 15 Pro's that are out now are on 3nm.

This talking point is outdated. AMD has been shipping 5nm CPUs for a year now.

The 3nm parts have just barely dropped in phones due to process delays and poor yields (N3B will miss targets and only N3E will meet the original N3 targets a year or 18 months late). So they are a non-factor in the pc/laptop market.

Happy to see efficiency numbers (something other than cinebench please) but there is no node deficit anymore. Apple laptops and zen laptops are on even footing now.

If there is still an efficiency deficit then the goalposts will have to be moved to something like “os advantage” (but of course Asahi exists) or “designed for different goals!” (yeah no shit, doesn’t mean it’s not more efficient).

Again, I am fairly sure that apple creams x86 efficiency in stuff like gcc (chrome compiles) or JVM / JavaScript interpreting (IntelliJ/VS Code) even without “the apple software”, but, everyone treats cinebench like it’s the end-all of efficiency benchmarking.

I absolutely know the apple stuff creams x86 by multiples of efficiency (possibly 10x or more) in openFOAM - a Xeon-w 28c (or even an epyc) pulls like, 10x the power for half the performance of a m1 ultra Mac Studio.

(And yes, “but that’s bandwidth-limited!” and yes, so are workloads like gcc too! Cinebench doesn’t work like 90% of the core, it doesn’t work cache at all, it doesn’t care about latency. That’s my whole point, treating this one microbenchmark as the sole metric of efficiency is misleading when other workloads don’t work the processor in the same way.)

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/334856-the-apple-m1-ultr...

Node proccess. Apple can out-spend AMD 100 to 1, they use their deep pockets to buy all the fabrication capacity of TSMC's latest proccess for a while, meaning AMD only has access to the previos one. This is where Apples perf/watt advantage comea from.

They are? AMD and Apple chips on the same process running at same clocks have very similar efficiencies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com