←back to thread

Apple Silicon M1 chip in MacBook Air outperforms high-end 16-inch MacBook Pro

(www.macrumors.com)
1080 points antipaul | 7 comments | 12 Nov 20 00:56 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
zdw ◴[12 Nov 20 04:30 UTC] No.25066465[source]▶
AMD's Zen 3 (Ryzen 5xxx series) are beating the Apple M1 in single core score: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/singlecore

As another datapoint Ian (of Anandtech) estimated that the M1 would need to be clocked at 3.25Ghz to match Zen 3, and these systems are showing a 3.2Ghz clock: https://twitter.com/IanCutress/status/1326516048309460992

replies(9): >>25066469 #>>25066520 #>>25066537 #>>25066720 #>>25067051 #>>25067086 #>>25068425 #>>25068547 #>>25069628 #
YetAnotherNick ◴[12 Nov 20 05:17 UTC] No.25066720[source]▶
No, they aren't. All of the top results have crazy overclocking and liquid cooling. You need to look the numbers here: https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks. Top end Zen 3 is slightly lower than M1.
replies(1): >>25066806 #
trynumber9 ◴[12 Nov 20 05:36 UTC] No.25066806[source]▶
Not exactly.

You can check the clock speeds: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4620493.gb5

Up to 5050MHz is stock behavior for the 5950X and it's using standard DDR4 3200 memory.

replies(2): >>25067097 #>>25067439 #
oysmal ◴[12 Nov 20 07:38 UTC] No.25067439[source]▶
Even if the Ryzen wins out, that would still be comparing a desktop CPU to a mobile one, using 105W vs 10W. It is incredible that we are making these comparisons. Apple outdid themselves.
replies(2): >>25067461 #>>25069520 #
The_Colonel ◴[12 Nov 20 07:42 UTC] No.25067461[source]▶
There's going to be a AMD mobile version of the 5000 generation soon and when looking back at 4000 generation their single core (boost) performance is going to be virtually the same as the desktop variant.

Desktop CPUs differ from the mobile CPUs mainly in how much can they boost more/all cores.

replies(2): >>25067778 #>>25068124 #
1. lliamander ◴[12 Nov 20 08:43 UTC] No.25067778[source]▶
In my experience mobile cpus run at about 75%-90% the single-core performance of desktop counterparts. Zen 3 APUs will be close.

Isn't the M1 fabbed on TSMC 5nm? Zen 3 is on 7nm. If a Zen 3 APU will run close to Apple Silicon I will be mightily impressed.

replies(2): >>25068392 #>>25068521 #
2. ernesth ◴[12 Nov 20 10:21 UTC] No.25068392[source]▶
So you mean Apple has this huge advantage of 5nm compared to 7nm but failed to outperform AMD? What a failure.

(that was sarcasm. My take is this performance is impressive but you should not be surprised if it does not completely outperform CPUs that should be less efficient)

replies(1): >>25075587 #
3. The_Colonel ◴[12 Nov 20 10:46 UTC] No.25068521[source]▶
Best single core scores for Ryzen 2 on Passmark:

* 3800X (105W desktop) scores 2855

* 4900H (45W mobile) scores 2707 or 95% of 3800X

* 4750U (15W mobile) scores 2596 or 91% of 3800X

replies(2): >>25070584 #>>25075471 #
4. YetAnotherNick ◴[12 Nov 20 15:02 UTC] No.25070584[source]▶
They are not even of same series. 3700U(fastest Ryzen 3000 15W processor) single core is 57.5% of 3700X(not the fastest Ryzen 3000 desktop).

Source:

[1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-7-3700x

[2]: https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/amd-ryzen-7-3700u

replies(1): >>25071123 #
5. trynumber9 ◴[12 Nov 20 15:53 UTC] No.25071123{3}[source]▶
AMD's naming scheme has mislead you.

Renoir is 7nm Zen 2 aka the 4000 series. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/cores/renoir

Matisse is also 7nm Zen 2 aka the desktop 3000 series. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/Matisse

Picasso is 12nm Zen+ aka the mobile 3000 series. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/cores/picasso

6. lliamander ◴[12 Nov 20 21:42 UTC] No.25075471[source]▶
That's pretty good. For geekbench we see:

* 3800XT = 1357 (100%)

* 4800H = 1094 (~80%)

* 4800U = 1033 (~76%)

I would expect a 5800U to score at best around 1500, but realistically closer to 1300-1450. That's still behind the M1, but pretty darn close for being behind a node (and will still probably be faster for applications that would require x86 translation).

7. lliamander ◴[12 Nov 20 21:51 UTC] No.25075587[source]▶
> So you mean Apple has this huge advantage of 5nm compared to 7nm but failed to outperform AMD?

I understand you are being sarcastic, but no, that's not what's not what I'm saying.

It is Apple Silicon that is faster (at least on paper). I'm saying I think even though AMD will have worse perf/watt, I think it will get impressively close despite it's less efficient fabrication process.