Not that bad? Those are absolutely terrible.

4% is probably close to noise level, so essentially you are a couple of percentage points faster on multicore with TWICE the total power envelope. Think about that.

And almost 1/5th slower in single core.

Also, you went from "It will OBLITERATE M2" to moving the goal post "not that bad" pretty quickly. I love it.

True.

But still, pointless to me - I don't care about power efficiency, battery life or any synthetic benchmarks.

I have two concerns with a laptop:

1. Can it run the latest Visual Studio at blazing fast speed?

2. Can it run Dota 2 on Full HD @ >144 fps?

So far ... M2 doesn't fulfill fully neither point 1 nor point 2 :)

That's not such a good result when you're talking about a chip with a 54w TDP (even more peak) vs a ~20w peak TDP for the M2.

4% faster for 2.5x more power isn't a win. The fact that 95% of users care more about that 18% single-threaded performance makes this even worse.

The TDP of the 5900HX is 45W.

Don't forget we are comparing last-gen AMD vs current gen M2.

M2 on Mac makes 1884/8717, but on Paralles -> 1681/7260.

So, the penalty is 11% on single, 17% on multi because of running on Windows via Paralles.

APPLE M1 average Single Core is 1706, average multi is 7421 on MAC.

If we apply the above penalty becomes -> 1706/7421 -> 1522/6180.

AMD 5900HX average Single Core is 1413, average multi is 7656.

So, AMD - 1413/7656 | Apple M1 - 1522/6180 -> Amd is 8% slower in single, 19% faster in multi.

> The TDP of the 5900HX is 45W.

The TDP according to AMD's website is "45+W" which they clarify to be a cTDP up to 54w TDP.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-9-5900hx