This is just not true. A mini going from idle to a full single-core load is a power increase of 6W. A heavy multicore load hits over 25W.
> A 16 firestorm core Mx will produce roughly the same multicore performance as your TR
With what fantasy math? 30% faster single core performance would be 16 * 1.3 = ~21 equivalent TR cores. It'd be less than half the performance of a 64 core ThreadRipper.
> And a $65 M1 dusts a 4800h that costs over 4x as much and using 1/3 the power
On-die memory is pretty much their one ace in the hole that nobody else will have the guts to match. Intel can't because their fabs are behind, and AMD probably doesn't have the resources to fork their architectures and/or piss off the server integrators.
I can't live without 64GB in my desktop and would love to have more, so the new Macs are not for me.
M1 isn't using on-die memory[1]. It's on-package, and likely little more than just off-the-shelf Micron or Samsung dram modules that are just soldered instead of socketed.
This is just not true. A mini going from idle to a full single-core load is a power increase of 6W. A heavy multicore load hits over 25W.
> A 16 firestorm core Mx will produce roughly the same multicore performance as your TR
With what fantasy math? 30% faster single core performance would be 16 * 1.3 = ~21 equivalent TR cores. It'd be less than half the performance of a 64 core ThreadRipper.
> And a $65 M1 dusts a 4800h that costs over 4x as much and using 1/3 the power
https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16252/119365.png
M1's single-core performance is very strong. But not enough to overcome a ~2x or greater core deficit, either, not at all.