By: pgerassi (pgerassi2012.delete@this.wi.rr.com), June 22, 2020 5:29 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Chester (lamchester.delete@this.gmail.com) on June 22, 2020 1:32 pm wrote:
> Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on June 22, 2020 11:44 am wrote:
> > Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on June 22, 2020 11:26 am wrote:
> > > It's real!!!!
> >
> > Well we saw something of how x86 apps will work.
> > Any comments from the various people making strong claims regarding this?
> > Of particular interest was (img)
>
> We haven't seen much in terms of CPU performance. Several comments:
I looked into Apple GPU performance. What they don't tell people is that their GPU renders using 16 bit integers versus AMD/NV/Intel which use 32 bit floating point. That is much easier for their GPU. Its like comparing ping pong balls versus basketballs. Manipulating the latter is a lot more work. And that is how they look more efficient or faster on these lightweight benchmarks on iPads/phones and such.
When they have to do rendering for games without losing fidelity, they are much slower. Their top end A12Z iGPU in an iPad get 27FPS on a 1080p AAA Game like Tomb Raider while a 6CU GCN 2700U APU gets 52FPS. This comparison using Geekbench graphics says the A12Z has 1.8 times the 2700U score. And of course there is the "we do better against a 2 year old part with our brand new part" problem. A14 will need to compete with Ryzen 5xxxU APUs and not Ryzen 2700U APUs.
So lets wait for the 3rd party benchmarks doing real work or a facsimile thereof.
Pete
> I think they're trying to show graphics acceleration works properly on the
> A12Z and Rosetta 2 is functional. There was no attempt to show A12Z being competitive
> with desktop Intel/AMD chips - even ones from a few years ago.
>
> IMO we have to wait a couple years for Apple to release a desktop ARM chip before drawing
> conclusions (or at least for the A12Z dev kit to get out into the wild). They said the transition
> would last that long. And I hope they do well, because that'll light a fire under Intel and
> AMD. The next few years should be very interesting for CPU microarchitecture.
> Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on June 22, 2020 11:44 am wrote:
> > Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on June 22, 2020 11:26 am wrote:
> > > It's real!!!!
> >
> > Well we saw something of how x86 apps will work.
> > Any comments from the various people making strong claims regarding this?
> > Of particular interest was (img)
>
> We haven't seen much in terms of CPU performance. Several comments:
- Showing off Word/Excel/Powerpoint is strange. Those apps run fine on an underclocked Atom
- DNG files in Lightroom - weird they didn't show exporting/raw conversion. Getting
> low res previews of effects was very fast on 2013-era mobile Haswell. Maybe they didn't
> show export because FPU performance is one of Intel's strengths (2x256-bit AVX execution
> units), and processing high res images really takes advantage of that. - Maya - I don't have Maya, but Blender's workspace view is a very light GPU load. I suspect it's the
> same for Maya. If they were confident in CPU performance, they'd show a CPU render. They did not. - Playback of multiple 4K streams - just means their GPU has a
> modern video engine. Intel's iGPUs could do this years ago - Tomb Raider - they ran through a small, isolated area without any enemies/allies
> present. I expect the weakest CPUs to have no trouble with that.
>
>
>
>
>
>
I looked into Apple GPU performance. What they don't tell people is that their GPU renders using 16 bit integers versus AMD/NV/Intel which use 32 bit floating point. That is much easier for their GPU. Its like comparing ping pong balls versus basketballs. Manipulating the latter is a lot more work. And that is how they look more efficient or faster on these lightweight benchmarks on iPads/phones and such.
When they have to do rendering for games without losing fidelity, they are much slower. Their top end A12Z iGPU in an iPad get 27FPS on a 1080p AAA Game like Tomb Raider while a 6CU GCN 2700U APU gets 52FPS. This comparison using Geekbench graphics says the A12Z has 1.8 times the 2700U score. And of course there is the "we do better against a 2 year old part with our brand new part" problem. A14 will need to compete with Ryzen 5xxxU APUs and not Ryzen 2700U APUs.
So lets wait for the 3rd party benchmarks doing real work or a facsimile thereof.
Pete
> I think they're trying to show graphics acceleration works properly on the
> A12Z and Rosetta 2 is functional. There was no attempt to show A12Z being competitive
> with desktop Intel/AMD chips - even ones from a few years ago.
>
> IMO we have to wait a couple years for Apple to release a desktop ARM chip before drawing
> conclusions (or at least for the A12Z dev kit to get out into the wild). They said the transition
> would last that long. And I hope they do well, because that'll light a fire under Intel and
> AMD. The next few years should be very interesting for CPU microarchitecture.
