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

Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 318 posts

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#271

Post by my123 »

imtringued wrote: post #248
glasshead969 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

M1 with all its CPUs pegged to 100% only hits 20W, so M1 still uses way less power than single core in Zen. Edit: In fact I just ran Cinebench R23 single thread test and package power barely crossed 5W.

> M1 with all its CPUs pegged to 100% only hits 20W, so M1 still uses way less power than single core in Zen. So do Ryzen CPUs. The 16 core Ryzen only needs 5W per core. It's purely a matter of frequency management. These comparisons are meaningless because you can say stupid things like "Ryzens are more power efficient than Ryzens" and still be right.

At 5W per core, you don't get anywhere near the single-threaded perf needed to beat an M1...

(20W per core is what it reaches on ST tests, with 17W more for the I/O die on desktop Ryzen, an overhead that'll be much lower on Cezanne hopefully)

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#272

Post by my123 »

scoopertrooper wrote: post #54
htk wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone know how many watts a single core can consume on the M1?

The Firestorm core uses 10.5W under heavy load and memory consumption.

10.5W is the whole system power draw.

What's actually reached is https://twitter.com/andreif7/status/1328777888213110793?s=21

6.6W CPU power, 9.3W package power (including DRAM)

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#273

Post by user5994461 »

p1necone wrote: post #60
rafaelturk wrote: post #26

I'm still impressed how fast Intel was overtaken by AMD and now Apple. Benchmarks don't even bother including Intel.

It wasn't really very fast. Intel got away with releasing basically the same CPU year over year with minor incremental improvements for almost a decade before anyone caught up.

It's more than a decade. The first core2duo were released in 2006.

I think people are thinking of the first i5/i7 from 2008 when they do the comparison, unfortunately AMD was out of the run before that.

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#274

Post by user5994461 »

bestboy wrote: post #249
Macha wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? You cannot buy 8gb of dual channel high performance ddr4 - it's a capacity with such a small market and low expected price that manufacturers won't bother. It's only Apple that insists on $200 extra for 16gb.

I'm sorry, if I wasn't making this clear enough. I'm not proposing to remove DIMMs. I'm merely suggesting to run the Java VM with the same amount of memory/heap for all the platforms. That is purely a software setting. The command-line switch to configure the heap size of a JVM is -Xmx The reason why I'm suggesting to have the same heap size for the benchmarks is that the maximum heap size is the single most importan…

They should set both the minimum size and maximum size to 4 GB (assuming it's enough).

Heap resizing has a much bigger impact on performance than garbage collection.

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#275

Post by user5994461 »

eloff wrote: post #25
AdrianB1 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is explained in the article: undervolting the CPU allows it to run longer at higher frequency, otherwise it will be thermally throttled. RAM has no such problem, overclocking improved performance.

Yes, but is that fair in a benchmark? The RAM maybe because all high end RAM speeds are technically out of spec and are overclocking. But messing with the CPU voltage to juice the benchmark results seems like cheating to me.

I would agree on principle however this benchmark is comparing a desktop CPU to a laptop CPU.

If anything underclocking the desktop CPU is making the benchmark more meaningful.

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#276

Post by smitty1110 »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #264
threeseed wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only part of Apple's marketing material that even references desktops are related to integrated graphics. So what's clear is that a lot of people are acting irrationally especially since the M1 is their low-end laptop CPU. At least wait for their mid-range laptop/desktop CPU scheduled for next year to make proper judgements.

Also let's not fail to mention the 5800x is a 600 dollar desktop CPU that consumes twice the maximum amount of power the M1 consumes.... while idling

And the AMD part had 4x the memory at 64gb. That has to help a lot with garbage collected benchmarks.

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#277

Post by user5994461 »

jeffbee wrote: post #171

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.

Just checked and I could see some Ryzen 5000 available on Amazon (not the 5900X though).

Honestly I expect the price and availability to suck big time for both. AMD can't manufacture half the volume they should to satisfy demand, while Apple is a poster child of $900 laptops costing €1000 when they finally cross the Atlantic long after release.

"Available at an Apple store" might be the biggest joke one could possibly say. There's only a handful of store worldwide.

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#278

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #202
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I only care about how it performs and how much it costs. > I honestly don't care if my CPU has 2 cores or 20 cores Both of these things cannot be true.

You misunderstand how some of those words work.

> I only care about how it performs and how much it costs.

> I honestly don't care if my CPU has 2 cores or 20 cores

So first means: "my only concerns are performance and cost". What determines performance and cost? Primary answer: number of cores. If you care about performance, you care if the CPU has 2 or 20 cores. If you care about cost, you care if the CPU has 2 or 20 cores. You might not articulate your concerns in this way, but they are intimately bound together.

If you only care about "good enough" performance and "in my range" cost, then your concerns are still bound up with core count.

So what's your apparently more correct understanding of some of those words?

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#279

Post by woah »

db48x wrote: post #160
tastyminerals wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may outclass it in performance. However, all my life I've been waiting for something that runs over 10h on a single charge. I am naturally surprised that this is not something that ppl truly appreciate in a laptop. Hell, I even bought a cheap Atom laptop once just to have more battery time. So as of now, there's literally no decent competitor to M1 laptops. One must be living under a rock to buy anything but Apple…

Using a laptop screen for 10 hours a day is a waste of a day, and if you're at your desk with multiple monitors then you don't need a laptop.

That’s just your opinion. You don’t need large monitors to code (lines of code are 80-100 characters), and moving around and changing positions (desk to couch etc) every couple hours while working is generally better for health and concentration. Not having to hunt around for a power adapter makes it that much easier and better.

Re: Ryzen 5800X vs. M1: Programming benchmarks

#280

Post by jsjohnst »

ben-schaaf wrote: post #115
jsjohnst wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The M1 competitor with similar thermals, close IPC per core, and on board GPU is widly rumored to be announced in Jan at CES. Ok, so what you’re saying is that AMD is wildly rumored to have a processor that you might be able to find as an option on a niche (term not used in a negative sense) brand laptop in Summer 2021 that directly competes with Apple’s M1 processor available in Fall 2020 on their highest sold mod…

If by "AMD is wildly rumored to have a processor" you mean it's been leaked and benchmarked multiple times, then sure: https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Ryzen-7-5800H-shows-decent...

I know it exists, I was just using the words used by the author I was replying too. How does that change the point I was making?
Post reply on HN