Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by watermelon0 1757 days ago
For some people it's a nice challenge to tackle.

Additionally, M1 is currently best? platform when comparing performance with power usage, and (at least MBA) comes in a great form factor. AFAIK there is no comparable device that has decent support for Linux.

2 comments

Ryzen mobile is of course still faster in multi-core tasks, although with a higher power demand.
Actually not--a 5900HX is about 1400/7500 (ST/MT GB5)

An M1 is about 1700/7600.

So call that a tie for MT, and 20% faster in ST...with a chip using about a third the power.

No, M1 is clearly slower in multi-core (to be fair, it has fewer threads). Not sure where you got your numbers from. 5900HX gets about 7800 in Geekbench 5, and the difference is much larger in some other multi-core tests. For example Cinebench gives 7800 for M1, 13800 for 5900HX.

E.g. https://nanoreview.net/en/cpu-compare/apple-m1-vs-amd-ryzen-...

It says in your link there is a 3% difference in "Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)" between the two? I would say that is practically equivalent, particularly since 5900HX comes in several TDPs. (It says "54 Watt" at your link.)

I took my data from perusing the Geekbench DB for the latest submissions...

Yeah I agree GB5 is roughly equivalent, others not so. Anyway this is just me being pedantic as so many people seem to think for whatever reason that M1 is the most powerful mobile chip while it certainly isn't. I do expect Apple's follow-up chips to take the multi-core lead too eventually.
> For some people it's a nice challenge to tackle.

So is killing a tiger, but you don't see any stripes on my wall.

Sure, getting Linux to run on hardware you purchased is equivalent to poaching. Very reasonable take.
I guess I took the OS X 10.4 joke a bit too far huh?
Well sticking the skin on your wall is just tacky. I normally just wait until people ask about the clawmarks and then feign reluctance as I explain.