You can’t compare nm between vendors - it’s just marketing numbers.

Not directly no, but the actual feature size and density of TSMC 7nm and Intel 10nm are comparable.

What about die size?

Then you have to ensure you're comparing chips designed for the same market segment. Die size comparisons work well if you're talking about a Cortex-A53 on 16nm vs 12nm. It doesn't work as well when you're talking about a full SoC, or even a desktop CPU+GPU combo where core counts for both sides of the chip can vary greatly.

Die size is independent of process size, customers can order most any die size they want.

My simplest laptop in current use has 4 times more memory than my current phone and I probably would need to make huge compromises to live with half as much. A lot of the chips in phones don't even have external memory buses. A top-of-the-line iPad Pro sports an 8-core asymmetrical core design, with 4 fast cores and 4 slow ones and, overall, is slower than a 2-core Core M-based MacBook (although it feels great because iOS does a lot less than macOS).

Also, Apple doesn't make its own A-series processors - it uses TSMC for that.

And iPhones still don't come close to competing with desktop-class processors in terms of performance. iPhones also use much less electricity, of course, but the point remains.

I don't know enough about this, but the GP's argument of "Intel hit the wall first because they were the first to reach that level of performance" makes logical sense to me.

"Apple’s iPhone Xs is faster than an iMac Pro on the Speedometer 2.0 JavaScript benchmark"

Yes, Safari, but iPhones do compete with your average desktop processor (not the top end).

https://macdailynews.com/2018/09/23/apples-iphone-xs-is-fast...

They can compete in certain workloads. As a computational tool however, desktop Intel CPUs can be optimized far, far beyond the capabilities of any A-series CPU.

Don't forget that Intel CPUs have things that A CPUs are missing like QuickSync, AVX2, massive PCIe interconnectivity.

Whether the A-series CPU could be modified into something competitive on that front is yet to be seen. Whether this actually matters considering the state of our compilers and software development is yet another question.

Apple's newest CPUs have hardware explicitly for accelerating Javascript, so it's not surprising they'd pull ahead there.

And as you said, you're comparing the top-of-the-line iPhone to an "average" CPU.

> Apple's newest CPUs have hardware explicitly for accelerating Javascript

They really don't. A12 added a couple of instructions for floating point conversions, but contrary to claims making rounds on Twitter at the time, they were not even generated by WebKit when the benchmarks were run.

Right, but Intel isn't falling behind AMD or apple in this comparison - it is falling behind TSMC.