Eric Fink (eric.delete.delete@this.this.anon.com) on June 2, 2022 5:43 am wrote:
> Anon (no.delete@this.spam.com) on June 2, 2022 12:35 am wrote:
>
> > Apple is using TSMC 5nm while Intel is using 10nm which they call 7nm
> > and AMD uses TSMC's 7nm, and both Intel Intel and AMD supports SMT.
> >
> > So, yes, Apple achieve almost the same performance at much lower power, but because they have power
> > advantage and Intel and AMD are willing to use A LOT of extra power to get 20% single thread.
> >
> > Zen 4 will be more apples-to-Apple comparison, at least on throughput, where perf per watt is what matters.
>
> That is the reply often given but I don't find it convincing. A14/M1 is not the only product at
> 5nm and yet it's peak performance and perf/watt so far are unmatched. Notebookcheck recently did
> a series of benchmarks comparing the efficiency and performance of latest CPUs at locked TDP,
> and a 5nm Firestorm at 4W outperformed a Zen 3+ at 9.5W — that's more than 2x difference in
> efficiency, and this is in a benchmark that maximally favours x86 as it runs a suboptimal code
> path on M1. I have hard time believing that TSMC's 5nm has some kind of magical properties that
> allows a vendor to reduce the power consumption by 2x at the same performance level.

Then do you think it is ARMv8 instruction set with the magical properties? In that case why not compare with another ARMv8 implementation?