←back to thread

Ask HN: Why hasn't x86 caught up with Apple M series?

447 points stephenheron | 1 comments | 25 Aug 25 21:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.262s | source

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. jerome-jh ◴[27 Aug 25 06:37 UTC] No.45036135[source]▶
This is a modularity vs integration tradeoff.

- Linux is a patchwork of SW, written in a variety of programming languages, using a variety of libraries, some of which having the same functionality. There is duplication, misalignment, legacy.

- MacOS is developed by a single company. It is much more integrated and coherent.

Same for the CPU:

- x86 accesses memory through an external bus. The ability to install a third party GPU requires an external bus, with a standardized protocol, bus width, etc. This is bound to lag behind state of the art

- Apple chips have on die memory, GPU (actually same package but not same die). Higher speeds, optimization, evading from standardized protocols: all this is possible.

This has an impact on kernel/drivers/compilers:

- x86: so many platforms, CPU versions, protocol revisions to support. Often with limited documentation. This wastes hell a lot of engineering time!

- Apple: limited number of HW platforms to support, full access to internals.