6 ms·

It is not, the laptop tested with the 6850U has a 30W PL2 and 50W PL1.

KaoruAoiShiho 4y ago
I don't know where you got those numbers. That it can sometimes hit higher peaks is a good thing and shouldn't be counted against it. https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen7-6850u-acpi/6 https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen7-6850u-acpi/6 According to this it should be an average of 19.3 Watts with a peak of 31.85 Watts. Apple also exceeds the stated tdp during peaks as well but we don't have that information atm. And remember there's a 14% perf gap between the two. My purpose isn't really to say AMD is definitely better since apple still probably takes the win in overall product, I think the MBA is thinner and that's important to me. But it's to show that x86 isn't behind in performance and that you're not making sacrifices in that department to maintain software compatibility with the x86 ecosystem. No sacrifices imo, AMD is just fine.
- ceeplusplus 4y ago
  That average is over the entire benchmarking suite, including single thread tests and when tests are loading from disk or otherwise not fully saturating the CPU. Some of those benchmarks in that power consumption number are GPU only! Take a look at the AOM AV1 power consumption graph (https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2208044-NE-6850U700026&sgm=1&sor https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2208044-NE-6850U700026&s...), it clearly displays huge drops when the test stops running. The CPU is turboing to 30 watts in 75% of the run. If you use the 15W hard cap performance numbers (low power mode), performance drops 20-40%. > Apple also exceeds the stated tdp during peaks as well but we don't have that information atm We actually do. Notebookcheck recorded 20W usage on a peak MT load (https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Air-M2-Entry-Review-A-very-good-but-too-expensive-daily-MacBook.636637.0.html#toc-5 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Air-M2-Entry-Rev...). The MBA is fanless so it's physically impossible for it to substantially exceed that amount without frying your lap. > And remember there's a 14% perf gap between the two Like I said, power is not equal at all. > x86 isn't behind in performance and that you're not making sacrifices in that department to maintain software compatibility with the x86 ecosystem Comparing the lowest end chip from one vendor to the highest end chip from another is not exactly a great look. Especially when the Arm chip is basically matching the x86 one while having only a few years of software optimization work.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    One could argue that the Ryzen's biggest pitfall is that it hasn't adopted a big.LITTLE configuration yet. Alder Lake keeps it's thirsty TDPs while staying relatively respectful of your temps and battery life. It's not quite as granular as Apple's core clusters, but the work with Thread Director is a promising start. Seeing AMD push heterogeneous systems so far down the roadmap virtually guarantees that they won't get Apple-level power efficiency for a while. On the bright side, AMD has carte-blanche to design whatever they want. Not only can they one-up Intel by implementing core clusters, but they could also one-up Apple by adding power management per-logical-core, or some weird chiplet optimizations. The sky is the limit, really.
    - rowanG077 4y ago
      Alder lake is much worse temp wise. Look at the new Dell XPS design. They literally had to remove the F keys to make room for additional heatsink to get the newer Alder lake CPUs to work in a reasonable way.
      - smoldesu 4y ago
        Those Dell XPS are no better than an Intel Macbook, they're designed by people who can't put function before form and consistently screw up their hardware design enough to avoid like the plague. I'm not the least bit surprised they didn't pick the right chip for the job, two years ago it was Dell sending out emails to XPS owners warning them not to leave it asleep in a bag for risk of permanent damage... I've tried a few Alder Lake laptops now (and daily-drive a 12700k desktop), and I don't really have any complaints about the thermals. Gaming, music production, video editing, none of it can seem to push the CPU past 40c under extended load. It's a solid chip that stands toe-to-toe with it's contemporaries, and I reckon it's going to get scarily good once Intel transitions it from 10nm++ to 5nm.
        rowanG077 4y ago
        I agree but that still doesn't invalidate my point. They had to significantly overhaul the thermal system for alder lake. I validating the point that it uses less power then the prior Intel gens.

I don't know where you got those numbers. That it can sometimes hit higher peaks is a good thing and shouldn't be counted against it. https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen7-6850u-acpi/6 https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen7-6850u-acpi/6 According to this it should be an average of 19.3 Watts with a peak of 31.85 Watts. Apple also exceeds the stated tdp during peaks as well but we don't have that information atm. And remember there's a 14% perf gap between the two. My purpose isn't really to say AMD is definitely better since apple still probably takes the win in overall product, I think the MBA is thinner and that's important to me. But it's to show that x86 isn't behind in performance and that you're not making sacrifices in that department to maintain software compatibility with the x86 ecosystem. No sacrifices imo, AMD is just fine.

ceeplusplus 4y ago
That average is over the entire benchmarking suite, including single thread tests and when tests are loading from disk or otherwise not fully saturating the CPU. Some of those benchmarks in that power consumption number are GPU only! Take a look at the AOM AV1 power consumption graph (https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2208044-NE-6850U700026&sgm=1&sor https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2208044-NE-6850U700026&s...), it clearly displays huge drops when the test stops running. The CPU is turboing to 30 watts in 75% of the run. If you use the 15W hard cap performance numbers (low power mode), performance drops 20-40%. > Apple also exceeds the stated tdp during peaks as well but we don't have that information atm We actually do. Notebookcheck recorded 20W usage on a peak MT load (https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Air-M2-Entry-Review-A-very-good-but-too-expensive-daily-MacBook.636637.0.html#toc-5 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Air-M2-Entry-Rev...). The MBA is fanless so it's physically impossible for it to substantially exceed that amount without frying your lap. > And remember there's a 14% perf gap between the two Like I said, power is not equal at all. > x86 isn't behind in performance and that you're not making sacrifices in that department to maintain software compatibility with the x86 ecosystem Comparing the lowest end chip from one vendor to the highest end chip from another is not exactly a great look. Especially when the Arm chip is basically matching the x86 one while having only a few years of software optimization work.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  One could argue that the Ryzen's biggest pitfall is that it hasn't adopted a big.LITTLE configuration yet. Alder Lake keeps it's thirsty TDPs while staying relatively respectful of your temps and battery life. It's not quite as granular as Apple's core clusters, but the work with Thread Director is a promising start. Seeing AMD push heterogeneous systems so far down the roadmap virtually guarantees that they won't get Apple-level power efficiency for a while. On the bright side, AMD has carte-blanche to design whatever they want. Not only can they one-up Intel by implementing core clusters, but they could also one-up Apple by adding power management per-logical-core, or some weird chiplet optimizations. The sky is the limit, really.
  - rowanG077 4y ago
    Alder lake is much worse temp wise. Look at the new Dell XPS design. They literally had to remove the F keys to make room for additional heatsink to get the newer Alder lake CPUs to work in a reasonable way.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      Those Dell XPS are no better than an Intel Macbook, they're designed by people who can't put function before form and consistently screw up their hardware design enough to avoid like the plague. I'm not the least bit surprised they didn't pick the right chip for the job, two years ago it was Dell sending out emails to XPS owners warning them not to leave it asleep in a bag for risk of permanent damage... I've tried a few Alder Lake laptops now (and daily-drive a 12700k desktop), and I don't really have any complaints about the thermals. Gaming, music production, video editing, none of it can seem to push the CPU past 40c under extended load. It's a solid chip that stands toe-to-toe with it's contemporaries, and I reckon it's going to get scarily good once Intel transitions it from 10nm++ to 5nm.
      - rowanG077 4y ago
        I agree but that still doesn't invalidate my point. They had to significantly overhaul the thermal system for alder lake. I validating the point that it uses less power then the prior Intel gens.