Rayla (rayla.delete@this.example.com) on November 16, 2020 3:16 pm wrote:
> Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on November 16, 2020 12:46 pm wrote:
> > Against GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and Radeon RX 560.
> > Not exactly state of the art, but not exactly ridiculous.
> >
> > As far as I can tell, these cards are around let's say 75W.
> > The state of the art is now about twice their performance at about 85W.
> > So bottom line is Apple's iGPU at, what, 10W? is half the current state of the
> > art for "mid-range, not insane power". Would that be a reasonable summary?
> >
> > My guess is that next year (beginning of Q2?) we get an
> > 8-large core M1X, for the iMac and MBP/mini pro, with
> > double the GPU resources, and so a credible match for the (reasonable power level) state of the art at ~20W.
> >
> > https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/16/m1-beats-geforce-gtx-1050-ti-and-radeon-rx-560/
> >
> >
>
> FWIW, GPUs with their own RAM are kind of a weird compare for integrated parts; there's considerable
> overlap between AMD's high-end integrated and low-end discrete parts, for instance, and often the former
> outperform the latter (while using less power) due to being higher integration. Additionally, both the
> cards you mentioned are 14nm. The real compare here is going to be Intel TGL and AMD Renoir.
>
> I expect the M1's GPU to be pretty favorable against both of those - doubly
> impressive if, as rumored, the M1 is sitting around 10W TDP for the chip.

Probably just Renoir. M1 slightly wins ST, Renoir slightly wins MT. TGL is still screwed over by Intel's process issues, so I expect it to lose badly in MT.