Right. That's what a pro laptop is. 128G of ECC RAM so you don't get crashes and errors. 24MB of cache. Fast and solid. That's a workstation - we use those for work.
But... Now you're saying the xeon I listed is the same as a 1 year old CPU, with half the cache of the Xeon, a lower clock, and half the core count. The mental gymnastics you have to perform are funny as hell to watch. Trump voter?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Lake#List_of_Tiger_Lake_...
So based on Anandtech’s benchmark you can pretty much extrapolate how that is going to go - slightly lower performance and slightly higher efficiency due to TDP limiting clocks a bit, but same cache, same core configuration, etc mean that it’ll be identical to if you went into bios on a 11980HK and set a lower power limit.
By the way the 11980HK is specifically the chip they called out the M1 Max as being a factor-of-6 more power efficient than. And in fact they said exactly what I just said - that limiting TDP will reduce performance on the 11955M and the perf/W gap will close a bit, but the performance gap will get even wider.
> In multi-threaded tests, the 11980HK is clearly allowed to go to much higher power levels than the M1 Max, reaching package power levels of 80W, for 105-110W active wall power, significantly more than what the MacBook Pro here is drawing. The performance levels of the M1 Max are significantly higher than the Intel chip here, due to the much better scalability of the cores. The perf/W differences here are 4-6x in favour of the M1 Max, all whilst posting significantly better performance, meaning the perf/W at ISO-perf would be even higher than this.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performanc...
What’s your dealie, why so toxic?