[hajile]

Apple's M3 Max CPU cores peak out at 55w for 16 cores (12p+4e). AMD's 8-core U-series chips peak out at 65-70w on CPU-only workloads and still loses out massively in pretty much every category.

If you downclock that AMD chip, it does get more efficient, but also loses by even larger margins.

[AnthonyMouse]

Because you're comparing a 16-core CPU to an 8-core CPU on threaded workloads, which as mentioned is where the multi-threaded workloads will favor the one with more cores on both performance and performance per watt. But why not compare it to the Ryzen that also has 16 cores, like the 7945HX3D? Because then the Ryzen is generally faster on threaded workloads, even though the TDP is still 55W -- and even though it's on TSMC 5nm instead of 3nm.

[hajile]

Who said I was comparing multithreaded loads? AMD will hit that on just one core with those boost clocks.

[AnthonyMouse]

The U series doesn't even hit that power consumption when all cores are in use -- its power consumption is between 10 and 30W. The higher power mobile chips are the H series, but even there the one that uses "65-70W" is the 16-core 7945HX3D, which is a 5nm/6nm chip you're comparing to Apple's 3nm one, and even then it's almost as fast. Most of even the H series uses less power than that, partially because some of them are 4nm but mostly because they have fewer cores.

But you can't really expect an older CPU on a previous generation process node with lower power consumption to be faster.