Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

hackaday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 206 posts

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#141

Post by geerlingguy »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #134
geerlingguy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run a number of other benchmarks for a better comparison (linked from my blog post: https://github.com/geerlingguy/sbc-reviews/issues/111 ). The Intel chip holds its own for multicore in less bursty workloads, where the fans help.

An interesting thing there is how much better the Geekbench scores are on Linux than Windows. Makes you think how the Intel/AMD chips would compare to Apple when both running the same OS. Or even just when both not being held back by Windows.

It's funny, too — in my testing with Asahi Linux, some benchmarks ran better on Linux than macOS on Apple Silicon!

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#142

Post by aurareturn »

ithadhumor wrote: post #138
aurareturn wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you're not a serious reviewer. If you're serious, you wouldn't mislead people. Even your blog post does not tell the truth nor does it have highlights of benchmarks that represent how people will actually use a $600 laptop. The people who are buying these laptops are likely not very technical and it's your job to guide them. They wouldn't know that an FP64 test on the $600 laptop is near useless - yet you…

Jeff has a day job. He is not a professional reviewer. He shows cool products and showcases what he’s passionate about. YouTube as a medium requires clickbait - that’s the belly of the beast.

I'm not denying that clickbait works on Youtube. He's amassed 1 million Youtube subscribers doing clickbait it seems.

My problem is that both the clickbait title and the conclusion are straight up wrong and misleading.

Even clickbait titles on Youtube will often have the correct conclusion. This is not the case here.

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#143

Post by aurareturn »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #139
aurareturn wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lost me. Maybe you can articulate what you're arguing from the start?

Suppose you have a system that under some workload will draw 10W to run the chipset, WiFi, SSD and so on and another 15W to run the CPU, so that it's 25W in total. The 15W CPU has X number of cores and gets a score of 1000 on some benchmark. Performance per watt is 40 points per watt. If you put 4X of the same cores in the same system then the CPU uses 60W, the WiFi etc. still use 10W, so the whole system uses 70W. I…

That's why any CPU reviewer worth their salt will isolate CPU power.

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#144

Post by KingMob »

LexGray wrote: post #71
3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #33

> no headphone jack I am fully old man screaming at the clouds here, but what does this cost for Dell to include? I insist on a wired headset - telecommunications already barely works, I don't want to add wireless+battery problems into the mix.

I want to say I’ve broken every headphone jack I ever had. Yanking on them, debris getting in the switch, debris triggering the optical if it had one. 3.5 was never a great design. Too many physical ways for it to break, from static from a loose connection, debris stuck inside like pebbles getting jammed, debris stuck under the switch preventing recognition. False positive or accidental triggers that take a while to…

> I want to say I’ve broken every headphone jack I ever had

> i would put headphone jack just behind power supply for least reliable

I've never broken a headphone jack, or known many people who have, honestly. Your experience sounds pretty unique.

I suspect way more people have had issues with Bluetooth connectivity, though thankfully, that's improved over time.

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#145

Post by ButlerianJihad »

LexGray wrote: post #71
3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #33

> no headphone jack I am fully old man screaming at the clouds here, but what does this cost for Dell to include? I insist on a wired headset - telecommunications already barely works, I don't want to add wireless+battery problems into the mix.

I want to say I’ve broken every headphone jack I ever had. Yanking on them, debris getting in the switch, debris triggering the optical if it had one. 3.5 was never a great design. Too many physical ways for it to break, from static from a loose connection, debris stuck inside like pebbles getting jammed, debris stuck under the switch preventing recognition. False positive or accidental triggers that take a while to…

How many times has a next-door neighbor accidentally plugged their headphones into your system? How many times did you try to plug your headphones into your wife’s jack? How many times did the cord fall out because you or your neighbor microwaved popcorn? Is it physically impossible to send an authentic stereo signal into your two earpieces? Every time you open your drawer, do you sift through 2 dozen earphones, speakers, phones and blood pressure cuffs that don’t belong to you? Is the NSA/CIA/FBI/ICE/USDA listening to your Spotify from the Starbucks parking lot? Everywhere you walk/drive/travel, are your earphones shouting, “Beats! Beats by Dr Dre! We are Beats! By Dr Dre!” five times per second?

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#146

Post by solarengineer »

geerlingguy wrote: post #130
Eufrat wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are trying to launder responsibility for a clickbait title to a computer program. Then you try to shift the topic to the public good you are providing. I don’t think it’s wrong to use clickbait, but come on, own up to it. You consciously chose to “let [YouTube] pick it.”

I never said it wasn't clickbait. If you don't like it, either install DeArrow or subscribe to my blog, where I tone it down for the more technical audience. (Or block/ignore my content, no skin off my back!)

Jeff, you may want to think about your credibility going forward. Please avoid becoming one of the "influencers" who collect pennies via clicks.

You have an opportunity to be continue to be taken seriously like you have been so far.

Surely there must be some way to avoid mis-leading clickbait titles.

Separately, asking your fellow community-members to not bother, and that too with an unaffected shrug, just kills the conversation we would want to have with you.

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#147

Post by HeWhoLurksLate »

aurareturn wrote: post #121
geerlingguy wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had three YouTube titles, this one got about 2x the watch time as the other two, so I let YT pick it. For technical readers, I write my blog posts. I don't have to (I lose money hosting that thing and all it's mostly just free training data for Anthropic, OpenAI, et all), but I enjoy writing, so I do it anyway. If you don't like the YT game, please subscribe to the blog's RSS feed. I much prefer text over video.

Just because this title did the best doesn't make it not misleading. If you are a serious reviewer, it wouldn't have been an option in the first place. You can make an even more outlandish title and get even more views. Doesn't make it right.

since it's too much to paste in here, here's 10 recent tech review videos from each of the top 10 most viewed tech youtubers:

https://pastebin.com/4PZe9iTf

Here's a few of them:

- Humane AI Pin Review: The Worst Product I've Ever Reviewed

- I Tested the World's Craziest Smartphone

- Do NOT Buy These Fake Tech Products!

- This Is Not a Normal Laptop...

- Unboxing the $10,000 Mystery Tech Box

- Don't Make This PC Building Mistake

- This Desk Accessory Changes Everything

- I Didn't Expect This Phone to Be This Good

- I Bought a Mystery Tech Box from Amazon

- Testing the Craziest Cheap Tech on Temu

Jeff Geerling's videos have fine titles.

Declaring that Jeff can't be a serious reviewer because he uses clickbait is kinda silly. Have you seen the state of journalism? Somehow the tabloids are frequently less clickbaity.

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#148

Post by whyagaindavid »

geerlingguy wrote: post #130
Eufrat wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are trying to launder responsibility for a clickbait title to a computer program. Then you try to shift the topic to the public good you are providing. I don’t think it’s wrong to use clickbait, but come on, own up to it. You consciously chose to “let [YouTube] pick it.”

I never said it wasn't clickbait. If you don't like it, either install DeArrow or subscribe to my blog, where I tone it down for the more technical audience. (Or block/ignore my content, no skin off my back!)

Overall you can always say - if you don't like it then ignore my content.

Then... people doing scam or misinformation can also say that

- ignore it.

No. We like your content.

While you may get more clicks etc at the moment - eventually you will lose subscribers.

You could have made the title at least like

- Intel tries hard to win against apple silicon - Almost there but not yet...

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#149

Post by spockz »

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #48
spockz wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m running CachyOS (based on arch) and it is blazing fast. Both with Firefox and Vivaldi. Especially compared to the windows install I used to have on the same machine. Or is your point only about windows?

Hmm, I'm using the CachyOS kernel but on NixOS. What CPU/GPU are you using? I tried using the flatpak Chromium in case it was some NixOS build optimization oddities but didn't see much of a difference.

I’m currently on a AMD 5900X with 9070 XT. Previously a 6700XT, didn’t make a difference in desktop only in games. Using KDE with Wayland. Recently I switched to the bore-lto flavour kernel as it seems to handle memory contention slightly better.

Re: Can Intel finally beat ARM on performance per Watt?

#150

Post by WithinReason »

aurareturn wrote: post #106
WithinReason wrote: post #23

If you normalise for both process node and clock speed, AMD and Apple are tied on single threaded perf/watt, and AMD Zen 5c cores have about a 12% perf/area advantage.

Absolutely not true. Apple leads in IPC, perf/area in CPU, and raw performance. We already have TSMC N7, N5, N4 AMD vs Apple CPUs to compare.

I wasn't talking about any of those
Post reply on HN