Even in terms of power efficiency AMD is in the same ballpark with their 4 and 5 U-series mobile parts, particularly when comparing multicore benchmarks on their 8 core/16 thread CPUs.

M1 is really most impressive when compared to Intel parts and especially when compared to the underspec’ed Intel parts that Apple used to ship.

Yes, the M1 is good but I’m honestly just tired of hearing about it. The story seems to be about the decline of Intel’s fab supremacy more than anything.

It's kind of a joke at this point. Talking about the runtime of something on a dual 7742 and someone pipes up with "Have you tried M1, foocloud has them available, it's so much faster".

Single threaded performance is on par with AMD 5xxx series parts. Consider that Apple is using the 5nm process while AMD is using the 7nm process.

I'm not sure how it compares in terms of power efficiency though I'd expect the ARM chips to be more efficient both because of the transistor size and the ARM CPU not needing to support instructions from the 60s.

I'm very excited to see a new competitor in the CPU game and I'm a big fan of ARM, hopefully we will see further disruption but in the PC space.

Imagine a 128 core desktop CPU. It will be interesting to see how software has to evolve in order to maximise utilization of the quantity of threads.

> [...] and the ARM CPU not needing to support instructions from the 60s.

Apparently, those weird instructions only take up a teeny-tiny amount of space on the CPU and are basically implemented in micro-code.

To be backwards compatible those instructions just need to be supported, but they don't need to be fast. So they are implemented such that they don't get in the way much.

Is it really a competitor given they don't sell their chips? For Intel maybe, given they lost the Apple market, but it doesn't look like it changed anything for the other players.

There's been a lot of comments about how ARM is going to revolutionise everything, but that doesn't seem to be the case for the chips you can actually buy (e.g. Qualcomm Vs AMD). Honestly, I don't see the M1 as a statement about how good ARM compared to x64, but how good Apple is compared to the rest of the field.

> It will be interesting to see how software has to evolve in order to maximise utilization of the quantity of threads.

Not only this, but the PHP/Python/Javascript kiddos will need to learn:

1. Languages that get closer to the metal. 2. Utilize those languages to make their applications aware of data locality, temporality, and branching.

The bottleneck of the future is memory and pipeline stalls. Spraying objects all over the heap is one of the dumbest things you can do with modern processors, but developers do it all the time. This needs to get fixed.

I think I might have been misunderstood here. I sort of feared I would be, as I have some experience in this regard. I don't really have an opinion on what is nicer, and I also don't mind people liking their stuff, if anything it makes my happy to know.

I also agree that it is weird to compare it to a desktop. In fact, my larger point is that I feel these benchmarks, and subsequent comment discussions, tend to imply this comparison. And, I don't see the harm in then showing what those numbers would be. If power consumption isn't important, I sure would like to know.

So for development in various ecosystems, would you say the M based is superior to Intel based in terms of efficiency and performance?