Zen 4, AMD Ryzen 5 7640U, 4.9Ghz, Single Core GB6 Score @ 2340.
Apple A17 Pro, 3.8Ghz, Single Core GB6 Score @ 2914
I dont think asking for an 20% increase in IPC is too much at this point.
Apple A17 Pro, 3.8Ghz, Single Core GB6 Score @ 2914
I dont think asking for an 20% increase in IPC is too much at this point.
https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/2986403
I can probably squeeze a bit more out if I boot to linux and cap the TDP for the MT tests.
I'm not saying the Apple silicon isn't impressive, but the 7640U (or any Phoenix silicon) isn't positioned as premium silicon like Apple's stuff. AMD would be using a wider bus, more on-die L3, faster packaged RAM, their TSV L3 or something like that if it was.
I am running good RAM, and some laptops run soldered LPDDR5X which is also very good. DDR5 SODIMMs are unfortunately not so good, as they need 1.35V to run at awful timings/speed.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/21069/modular-lpddr-becomes-a...
Honestly I hope they come to desktops and servers too. The performance of full size ddr5 dimms seems OK for now, but it must be close to its limit if SODIMMs are already past their limit.
Zen 4, AMD 7800X3D, 5.04Ghz, Single Core GB6 Score @ 2833.
Apple A17 Pro, 3.8Ghz, Single Core GB6 Score @ 2914
The reason why Phoenix were chosen was because of power saving and TDP figures. If 7800X3D were using 28W on single core, the A17 Pro was using ~5W.
Look: Apple fabs good cores. As a matter of fact, they're pretty much the only company even attempting to make ARM cores. They have lots of money, and good designs on dense silicon usually equals fast chips.
This is a brutally facetious comparison though. Nevermind the obvious ARM/x86 disparity, or even the node difference in fabrication; you're not even comparing mobile cores to each other. What kind of serious comparison takes desktop wattages and compares them to a smartphone SOC?
If you take the chip the parent mentioned (7640U) instead of picking a random desktop option, the gap closes considerably. 7640U scores 2559 in single-core, which scales very well for multicore workloads. Given that it's a 6-core chip with a 30w max TDP, a single core probably couldn't draw more than 5w either.
It's alreay on par.
p.s.: I don't care about power consumption :)
Clearly! I don’t know if I’d say it’s “on par” if an Apple A-series part (i.e., low power enough to be shipped in iPhones and not in any of their “serious” computers) is actually getting slightly higher numbers than the fastest, most power hungry core that AMD has right now!
It isn't. The A17 Pro gets 7199 on GB6 multi-thread compared to 18778 for the 7950X, and multi-thread workloads are the only thing that will cause the 7950X to use its full TDP. If you give the Apple chip a desktop's power budget, the single-thread number barely changes because that isn't what sets the TDP.
And Zen4 is punching above its weight because it's on TSMC 5nm compared to the A17 Pro on TSMC 3nm. Try comparing the chips that use the same process.
But how many cores does the A17 have versus the 7950X?
The reason it uses more power is that it's less efficient. The reason it has higher multi-core performance is that it has four times the number of cores.
Apple A17 Pro: 6 cores (4 efficiency and 2 performance)
Refs: https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/ryzen-9-7950x.c2846 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A17
There is no 'serious' computers coming out of Apple for quite some time now - just glorified consumption devices :)
Can Apple sillicon run Dota2@200fps or Visual Studio (Not CODE!) 2022+ as good as an x86? Can I put a 7900XTX on a Mac and run Windows natively ?
I know how to cool CPUs such that they can run under load for days and weeks and be relatively quiet.
The point is: the m series chips get you a crap ton of performance with utter silence. The m2 pro Mac minis — amazing. No fans whatsoever.
Some professionals have workloads that require more multi core perf (not to mention proper Linux support). And running those dead silent is trivial.
1. Get a usb extender and a fiber optic displayport extender.
2. Stick your computer in the garage, run the cables to whatever room and hook up your monitor and peripherals.
3. Enjoy as perfect silence and low heat generation as can be possibly be achieved. (Monitors generate heat and sometimes electrical noise, and mice and keyboards are what they are)
> I don’t care about power consumption
At the end chose the 7950X, super happy about it.
Absolute beast.
The 7950X, though, is on 5nm.
You should, considering it's really the only bottleneck to getting more perf
I have seen this over and over again and it is tiring. We are discussing ISA, uArch ( and possible Node as well ) in a ChipandCheese article. Not a CPU comparison / gamer review site.
Zen 4, AMD Ryzen 5 7640U, TSMC 4nm, Single Core GB6 Score 2340
Apple A17 Pro, TSMC 3nm, Single Core GB6 Score 2914
There are definitely less efficient chips you could bring into the comparison fold, but the M2 is a mobile chipset. You need another mobile chip if you want to draw more interesting power consumption comparisons.
[0] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Framework-Laptop-13-5-Ryzen-7-...
What I ultimately want, is a collection of SBCs that are able to be remotely booted so I can have Intel and AMD x86 systems, ARM, Risc-5, Apple that can spin up on demand.
Intel has vPRO and AMD has AMD DASH for remote power on. A Mac Mini won't have remote power on, but if you're willing to just keep it slept, Wake-On-LAN is an option.
If your goal is to go cheap but still have decent performance it depends on what exactly you need it to perform at but mini PCs like Beelink usually give otherworldly performance vs what you'd expect in the 100-200 dollar category.
[Edit] Or someone could have said: I think you meant processor not die, and I would have said: Yes sure, not sure what was on my mind.
Most OEMs continue to sell systems built around last years processor (or even a couple year old processors), and they can increase the memory in those systems as needed. Maybe 4GB was enough when they came out, but now you need 8GB or 16GB to sell a system with an older processor. Not a big deal with socketed RAM, not even a huge deal with soldered RAM, but the processors with 4GB on package become very hard to sell.
Hmm, curious what the "Apple way" is here..
> simpler cores
Apple's cores are very far from simple. They are much larger than the other ARM CPUs on the market, and this is also why they are faster than other ARM CPUs on the market.
> trading die area for ever larger caches
Apple has big L1 comparatively, but L2 & L3 are nothing special. Certainly nowhere close to the massive caches that AMD's X3D offers.
> also on-die memory
Apple doesn't have on-die memory. AMD is the only company to have shipped on-die memory to consumers (they were also the first to ship it), and they only did so on GPUs so far. Nvidia & Intel are playing with it for datacenter products, though, but that's about it (H100 & Xeon Max respectively)
0: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...
What distinction are you drawing such that Fury X interposers count as “on-die memory” but apple’s literal stacking of the LPDDR on the actual die doesn’t?
Apples technique is more advanced than fury actually: fury is just on-package, not on-die, but apple is literally doing v-cache style stacking of the whole memory subsystem right on top of the die.
Of course fury x was earlier, but die stacking is a more advanced technology, there is a reason AMD didn’t do that for 5+ years after fury x. And apple actually beat AMD to market with on-die stacking, by several years (epyc v-cache was 2022 or 2021) with a more advanced implementation (the whole memory subsystem rather than just v-cache).
What isn’t how what works? Use your words.
(People literally are in such a race to pick a fight and defend their best friend AMD they forgot to make the rest of the post lol. Simply say the most mild thing and AMD people trip over themselves to do this stuff constantly, it’s funny.)
Do you think OP is referring to something other than fury x/Vega when they said “gpu shipped to consumers”? That’s the only thing that comes to mind, literally there are only less than a half dozen consumer gpus from AMD in the stacking era so I don’t know what else it would be.
If you mean true memory in the die, not stacked, not just a cache - AMD has never shipped that to consumers (or professionals) in a gpu. Nobody puts memory in the gpu because it would be a waste of die space.
But like, gotta defend AMD, better hammer that downboat and drop a pithy six-word/single-sentence reply. Social media is constantly seething with the AMD defense force looking for fights, gets super old.
Like, it was literally less than 30 seconds from clicking post on my comment to seeing your debate determinating cliche. What fine discourse we have here.
Thanks for the second sentence.
AMD’s consumer gpus don’t use v-cache. Apple is using the same memory-on-package technique that fury x and Vega use. Rdna3 cache is not v-cache, just another flavor of mcm.
There's pictures of Apple's silicon all over the Internet, didn't think to bother even looking at one?
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EWuFBHNeGSfhjJfoWFxL7D-102...
It's very obviously not on die. On package maybe, but definitely not on-die.
Since you're talking about die stacking i assume you're now talking about their "low end" phone parts. That's a quite different technology from V-cache, foveros, or even Apple's "UltraFusion." It's also not at all a unique technology to Apple, it's very common in the phone SoC space where power consumption is so limited that the thermal issues are mostly negated.