Leaked Apple ARM CPU benchmark beats Intel Core i9 16-inch MacBook Pro
techradar.com
techradar.com
Reminder, Ipad Pro is apparently faster in multi-threading than 48 thread ZEN EPYC chip.
On a Zen 3 Ryzen 12 Core [1], again on a node that is one generation behind. But with much higher TDP allowance.
Feels like maybe we're getting the same sort of trickery with thermals. I've seen a lot of over-the-top benchmarks lately from low-power devices, but if you tell them to run the task in a loop for half an hour, they saturate their heatsinks, and drop the clock to the sustained "non-turbo" clock or even throttle below it, so the score on the 10th run is a fraction of what it was on the 1st.
On the one hand, this is obviously gaming the knowledge that many benchmarks are short and bursty, but it makes me wonder if there's merit in trying to design a thermal solution that would allow permanent boost clock for thin-and-light-is-irrelevant tasks. If you had a iOS based kiosk or whatever, I could imagine installing a "shucked" iPad that was mounted to a much bigger cooler.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/11/microsoft-surface-la...
A14X: (4 big cores and 4 little cores) - 1634 Single Core & 7220 Multi-Core.
If accurate, it looks like a theoretical Macbook Air with this next gen iPad Pro chip would be more than competitive with Microsoft's offering.
Is there any reason to believe Apple won't apply the same pricing strategy to an Apple Silicon Macbook Air?
The reviews for the Surface Go Laptop are hilariously bad, as they are reviewing if it were intended to be a gaming or power user device. That's insane. It's a cheap, small, touchscreen laptop for doing schoolwork and writing Word documents - and probably the best one you can buy in that price range. I got one for my kids; once you uninstall the god-awful Skype and Mail apps, it runs silently all day long. The 3:2 screen makes writing Word documents much nicer than any similarly-sized widescreen laptop. Etc.
Anyway, I don't think that the MacBook Air would be positioned with this is a competitor. Apple tends to avoid this price range.
Moving down to the iPad Pro version of the chip, given it's more than adequate performance, would already leave more pricing wiggle room.
But https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-i9-9900k... scored 9340.
So, this seems nice, but not world-breaking.
>Comparing it against Apple’s A13, things aren’t looking so rosy as the Intel CPU barely outmatches it even though it uses several times more power, which doesn’t bode well for Intel once Apple releases its “Apple Silicon” Macbooks.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16084/intel-tiger-lake-review...
Looks like even the midrange AMD Zen3 stuff beats this...