[AgloeDreams]

AMD has tried a bit, Intel probably won't. You can still get great numbers on desktop x86 with better cores and processes. Zen 4 is perfectly good so far. Apple's M1 already outperforms most desktop CPUs, it goes to reason that a model with more cores and bigger L1 could outperform the whole industry.

Surface Go is nowhere close, half as fast in single core, 1/5th as fast in multicore. The 5W TDP is really a generic number with no real meaning as Intel doesn't really abide by it, I would say it probably uses about the same power as the M1, possibly much more under turbo while also having a much higher power floor (IE: When at idle the Surface go uses much more power)

Keep in mind that the Surface Go is very low-cost and the CPU is at a 14nm build.

[anoncow]

Would the M1 with more cores be able to beat the threadripper at the same wattage? Right now the M1 stands at a score of 8000 Vs Threadripper's 25000. The comparison I am sure is not just about comparing benchmark scores, but is there a prediction possible given that the M1 is at a 24W TDP whereas the threadripper has a 280W TDP (A 3x change in the benchmarks alongside a 10x change in TDP)

Does Qualcomm or Samsung have a M1 beater in their kitty?

[hajile]

It costs more to move 2 bytes into the CPU than to actually add them. As you go bigger, you spend an increasingly larger amount of time and energy moving data as opposed to actually calculating things.

Anandtech numbers showed 50-89% of total power consumption for the 7601 being used for Infinity Fabric. With 89w remaining spread among 32 cores, that's a mere 2.78w per core or 1.39w per thread at an all-core turbo of 2.7GHz.

Oh, I'd note that the 7601 is a 14nm Zen 1 part.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13124/the-amd-threadripper-29...!