The major difference between Ryzen 5000-series and Apple M1 is the former is sold out worldwide and the latter is on the shelf at every Apple Store in the world. Comparing the M1 to something that nobody can buy is dumb.
Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
171–180 of 318 posts
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#172To summarise: Top-of-the-line desktop computer barely beats an ultraslim passively cooled laptop.
Also read the opening paragraph, they also massively overclocked the ram and underclocked the CPU. Out of the box the 5800 loses.
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#173To summarise: Top-of-the-line desktop computer barely beats an ultraslim passively cooled laptop.
Since when twice as fast is barely?
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#174I’m just sitting here wondering why a mobile chip from a 1100$ fan-less notebook is even a challenging contender in this race
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still... $450 for the CPU only vs a $999 laptop, for most use cases the apple's MBA offers much more value and will have slower depreciation.
CPU: $450 (5800x) GPU: $150 (1650 super) Storage: $60 (samsung 970 evo 250gb) PSU: $90 (silverstone sfx 500w 80 plus gold - there's probably cheaper options but most PSUs seem sold out on amazon) RAM: $70 (16gb 3200mhz CL16, gskill or team group) Case: $70 (Silverstone tek) Motherboard: $120 (asrock b550-m itx) There's your $1000 mac killer. I wouldn't call it a sensible build, but it should outperform the mac across…
By the point you get the Mobo CPU and PSU you already are over the price of an M1 Mac Mini and even then, to get the results seen in this you need to overclock ram and under volt the CPU in a big way, putting you at risk of a good bin vs bad situation. Personally the fact that they had to start with some serious tweaking on a desktop to even compete with a laptop CPU seems messy.
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#176Those are single core benchmarks, the wow effect is because you are comparing on single core benchmarks 4 core against 24 core cpu , the 5800x with only 4 cores enabled would probably still beat the m1 , probably even with one
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't include monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, webcam, microphone, battery backup, and fingerprint scanner which would be necessary to make it "comparable" to a base model Macbook Air. It also isn't a portable, fanless laptop which has its perks.
There are plenty of 8 core/16 thread Ryzen 4750U laptops for around the same price that outclass the M1 in multicore benchmarks.
In most programming benchmarks, single core and RAM is the game. That’s why the machine in this post has overclocked ram and an undervolted CPU. In that area the 4750u loses badly. In Node for example you will see nearly 60% better performance on M1.
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#178Last year i replaced my aging mac pro with a 3900x amd Hackintosh. The cpu upgrade was hard to believe. Everything felt fast in a way even my 2019 air failed to achieve. The idea that the laptop-grade M1 is keeping pace in these tests with the processor in my desktop is mind blowing. Sure the 5800x was tuned for these tests. Sure the M1 is on 5nm. All of this is missing the point: Intel created a huge market opportun…
> Let's all hope intel can turn things around and keep the space competitive. Although they have a lot of work to do, I can't help but think people writing off Intel are way too keen. Intel's annual dividend is still bigger than AMD's revenue IIRC, so at worst they should be able to buy themselves out of the hole they're in.
That’s not how that works. The dividend may be larger, but that only is somewhat realistic if AMD were trading at 1x revenues (P/S ratio)...which they aren’t. Intel can’t afford AMD without huge financing or share issuance.
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#179Regarding the 5nm vs 7nm thing, I expect apple to be at least 1 node or intra-node improvement (eg: 5nm vs 5nm+ or 4nm) ahead for foreseeable future. They pay TSMC pretty penny to have access to cutting edge nodes. Not much different from how Intel had node advantage over others albeit here apple paying for it so at-least others aren't locked out of it for too long.
I think it's interesting Apple is continuing what they started with Intel. Remember Apple's deal with Intel where Intel would hold back their newest CPUs from the rest of the market so Apple could have their big reveal and "Worlds fastest blahblahblah" blurb to push their Mac refreshes? But apple never really upgraded their proc offerings, and you couldn't upgrade your processor on the machine you bought, so after 6 months or whatever they would be lagging behind in performance vs what you could build or buy elsewhere.
Well I guess once AMD whooped Intel that was not longer going to be an option. Not only would Intel not be able to deliver their "World's fastest blah blah" marketing claim, but Intel couldn't afford to hold anything back from the general market. I guess their little deal with TSMC letting them clear the cobwebs off this strategy and continue it for a bit longer going forward..
Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
And directly above that graph says: > please keep in mind that for single-threaded tasks, a single core doesn’t consume all 95W TDP headroom of the CPU. Based on Anandtech’s analysis, a single 5800X core only consumes 17.3W at 4850 MHz Remember these are single-threaded benchmarks.
Interestingly, the conclusion states the following: > While M1 is indeed very powerful for its size, when comparing it to the high-end x86 desktop, it is still slower. Okay, great. I'm not sure what to expect when you compare the lowest end first generation processor from Apple to one of the more high-end of the spectrum x86. Edit: Forgot to mention how the power draw on the M1 is still significantly less; m1 with al…
> the lowest end first generation processor from Apple
That's an interesting way of describing Apple's highest performing, late model CPU.