Most active commenters
  • dagmx(3)

←back to thread

447 points stephenheron | 16 comments | | HN request time: 1.074s | source | bottom

Hi,

My daily workhorse is a M1 Pro that I purchased on release date, It has been one of the best tech purchases I have made, even now it really deals with anything I throw at it. My daily work load is regularly having a Android emulator, iOS simulator and a number of Dockers containers running simultaneously and I never hear the fans, battery life has taken a bit of a hit but it is still very respectable.

I wanted a new personal laptop, and I was debating between a MacBook Air or going for a Framework 13 with Linux. I wanted to lean into learning something new so went with the Framework and I must admit I am regretting it a bit.

The M1 was released back in 2020 and I bought the Ryzen AI 340 which is one of the newest 2025 chips from AMD, so AMD has 5 years of extra development and I had expected them to get close to the M1 in terms of battery efficiency and thermals.

The Ryzen is using a TSMC N4P process compared to the older N5 process, I managed to find a TSMC press release showing the performance/efficiency gains from the newer process: “When compared to N5, N4P offers users a reported +11% performance boost or a 22% reduction in power consumption. Beyond that, N4P can offer users a 6% increase in transistor density over N5”

I am sorely disappointed, using the Framework feels like using an older Intel based Mac. If I open too many tabs in Chrome I can feel the bottom of the laptop getting hot, open a YouTube video and the fans will often spin up.

Why haven’t AMD/Intel been able to catch up? Is x86 just not able to keep up with the ARM architecture? When can we expect a x86 laptop chip to match the M1 in efficiency/thermals?!

To be fair I haven’t tried Windows on the Framework yet it might be my Linux setup being inefficient.

Cheers, Stephen

1. hnaccountme ◴[] No.45022879[source]
Apple tailors their software to run optimally on their hardware. Other OSs have to work on a variety of platforms. Therefore limiting the amount of hardware specific optimizations.
replies(4): >>45022928 #>>45022969 #>>45022989 #>>45023107 #
2. pjerem ◴[] No.45022928[source]
Well I don’t think so.

First, op is talking about Chrome which is not an Apple software. And I can testify that I observed the same behavior with other software which are really not optimized for macOS or even at all. Jetbrains IDEs are fast on M*.

Also, processor manufacturers are contributors of the Linux kernel and have economical interest in having Linux behave as fast as they can on their platforms if they want to sell them to datacenters.

I think it’s something else. Probably unified the memory ?

replies(1): >>45023084 #
3. dagmx ◴[] No.45022969[source]
This argument never passes the sniff test.

You can run Linux on a MacBook Pro and get similar power efficiency.

Or run third party apps on macOS and similarly get good efficiency.

replies(2): >>45023131 #>>45023535 #
4. aurareturn ◴[] No.45022989[source]
The fastest and most efficiency Windows laptop in the world is an M4 MacBook running Parallels.
replies(1): >>45023091 #
5. yalok ◴[] No.45023084[source]
Chrome uses tons of APIs from MacOS, and all that code is very well optimized by Apple.

I remember disassembling Apple’s memcpy function on ARM64 and being amazed at how much customization they did just for that little function to be as efficient as possible for each length of a (small) memory buffer.

replies(1): >>45023738 #
6. yalok ◴[] No.45023091[source]
How does it compare with VMWare? I’d rather not use Parallels…

edit: whoever downvoted - please explain, what's wrong with preferring VMWare? also, for me, historically (2007-2012), it's been more performant, but didn't use it lately.

replies(1): >>45024154 #
7. mmcnl ◴[] No.45023107[source]
No, it's not, it's absolutely the hardware. The vertical integration surely doesn't hurt, but third-party software runs very fast and efficient on M-series too, including Asahi Linux.
replies(1): >>45023209 #
8. danieldk ◴[] No.45023131[source]
You can run Linux on a MacBook Pro and get similar power efficiency.

What? No. Asahi is spectacular for what it accomplished, but battery life is still far worse than macOS.

I am not saying that it is only software. It's everything from hardware to a gazillion optimizations in macOS.

replies(1): >>45023171 #
9. dagmx ◴[] No.45023171{3}[source]
It’s worse at switching power states, but at a given power state it is within the ball park of macOS power use.

The things where it lags are anything that use hardware acceleration or proper lowering to the lower power states.

10. dancek ◴[] No.45023209[source]
Does Asahi Linux now run efficiently? I tried it on M1 about two years ago. Battery life was maybe 30% of what you get on macOS.
11. kangs ◴[] No.45023535[source]
unfortunately, contrarily to popular belief, you cannot run Linux natively on recent macbooks (m4) today.
replies(2): >>45023949 #>>45026781 #
12. pm215 ◴[] No.45023738{3}[source]
memcpy (and the other string routines) are some of the library functions that most benefit from heavy optimisation and tuning for specific CPUs -- they get hit a lot, and careful adjustment of the code can get major performance wins by ensuring that the full memory bandwidth of the CPU is being used (which may involve using specific load instructions, deciding whether using the simd registers is better or not, and so on). So everybody who cares about performance optimises these routines pretty carefully, regardless of toolchain/OS. For instance the glibc versions are here:

https://github.com/bminor/glibc/tree/master/sysdeps/aarch64/...

and there are five versions specialised for either specific CPU models or for available architecture features.

13. sys_64738 ◴[] No.45023949{3}[source]
Depends what "natively" means. You can virtualize Linux through several means such as Virtual Box.
replies(1): >>45024916 #
14. aurareturn ◴[] No.45024154{3}[source]
Looks about the same between Parallels and VMWare: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/13494570?baseli...

Also, here's proof that M4 Max running Parallels is the fastest Windows laptop: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/13494385?baseli...

M4 Max is running macOS running Parallels running Windows and is only using 14 out of 16 possible cores and it's still faster than AMD's very best laptop chip.

15. svantana ◴[] No.45024916{4}[source]
...but you won't get similar power efficiency, which was claimed.
16. dagmx ◴[] No.45026781{3}[source]
That doesn’t really affect what I’m saying though. Yes, support capped out with the M2, but you can still observe the properties of efficiency on there.