Question Laptop SoCs: Qualcomm vs Apple vs AMD vs Intel

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

FlameTail

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2021
4,095
2,465
106
Might as well put the M4 instead of the M3, because that’s going to be its main competitor in the Apple space.
No, the whole reason why Lunar Lake vs M3 comparison will be so interesting is because they are both made on the same node- N3B.

So we can see who has the better architecture.
 
Reactions: SiliconFly

jdubs03

Senior member
Oct 1, 2013
950
594
136
No, the whole reason why Lunar Lake vs M3 comparison will be so interesting is because they are both made on the same node- N3B.

So we can see who has the better architecture.
We know who has the better architecture. It’s not even close.

And we know the expected range for power draw reduction/performance increase from N3B to N3E so we can approximate the difference.
 
Reactions: Nothingness

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,350
3,068
106
@poke01 I recall you saying you wanted to create an Intel Lunar Lake vs Apple M3 thread.

The time is ripening to do so.
Not in the MacBook yet so absolute PITA to test.
iOS is an affront to mankind, after all.
I won’t talk M4 here till it comes to MacBooks. iPads with M chips are truly wasted products as most users won’t do demanding work on them.

As for comparing with Lunar, very excited to compare. But it looks like some Asian reviewers released some info.

Intel does seem to have better low power media engines. We will have to wait for M4 and if Apple made theirs any better.
 

Attachments

  • 1726919814745.png
    220.4 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,350
3,068
106
No, the whole reason why Lunar Lake vs M3 comparison will be so interesting is because they are both made on the same node- N3B.

So we can see who has the better architecture.
M3 vs Lunar Lake. Short version for now
CPU - Apple
GPU - technically Apple but software support such as games it’s Intel.
Media Engines - Intel
I/O - Intel
NPU - Apple
 

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,350
3,068
106
if I was to pick my favourite SoC this year it would be Lunar lake because I’m a media freak. So yeah might be biased lol
 
Reactions: SiliconFly

Nothingness

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2013
3,134
2,145
136
I won’t talk M4 here till it comes to MacBooks. iPads with M chips are truly wasted products as most users won’t do demanding work on them.
Agreed, but some users do real pro work on iPad. A friend of mine, who is designer, make drawings and light renderings on an iPad Pro with the stylus, before switching to his Mac. Does he need the power of an M4? Not sure, but he could do more with it.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,834
4,819
136
No, the whole reason why Lunar Lake vs M3 comparison will be so interesting is because they are both made on the same node- N3B.

So we can see who has the better architecture.

If Apple waits much longer to put out M4 Macs I'm gonna start getting suspicious they'll be delivered with N3P.
 
Reactions: gdansk

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,350
3,068
106
I got a thinkpadT490s for $370AUD, i5 8th, 16GB RAM and 256GB SSD with a 100% new battery. Excellent condition

I mainly got it for the excellent keyboard for writing essays and reports. Installed CachyOS and its blazing fast for chromebook tasks. New chromebooks go for $250-$450AUD and they are trash and slower than this.

Its amazing how far we came since 2018 in laptop SoCs.

 

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,827
2,203
136
I have a Lenovo Flex 2-1 14 inch convertible with the same processor. How much of a pain was CachyOS to install for you? I've got Windows 11 on it for now, and it performs well enough, but, I do like a good adventure...
 

jdubs03

Senior member
Oct 1, 2013
950
594
136
Efficiency numbers don’t look good for LNL.
Are you referring to something like Cinebench MT per wattage?
Because at least for battery life, it seems to do pretty well from what I see of all the reviews out so far.
 

DavidC1

Golden Member
Dec 29, 2023
1,071
1,724
96
Are you referring to something like Cinebench MT per wattage?
Because at least for battery life, it seems to do pretty well from what I see of all the reviews out so far.
Yea, we weren't expecting huge on the MT performance side.

They delivered on the battery life claim, and the graphics are much better as well. It's everything Qualcomm said it would do, but by Intel.

It'll also cause a psychological shift from ISA is somehow the problem for battery life issues on x86.
 

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,350
3,068
106
I have a Lenovo Flex 2-1 14 inch convertible with the same processor. How much of a pain was CachyOS to install for you? I've got Windows 11 on it for now, and it performs well enough, but, I do like a good adventure...
It was easy, just make sure to choose refind as the boot loader.
 

mikegg

Golden Member
Jan 30, 2010
1,847
471
136
Because at least for battery life, it seems to do pretty well from what I see of all the reviews out so far.
It throttles to get that battery life.

Are you referring to something like Cinebench MT per wattage?

They delivered on the battery life claim, and the graphics are much better as well. It's everything Qualcomm said it would do, but by Intel.
Both MT and 1T are significantly behind Qualcomm.

LNL has terrible overall CPU performance.
 

jdubs03

Senior member
Oct 1, 2013
950
594
136
It throttles to get that battery life.




Both MT and 1T are significantly behind Qualcomm.

LNL has terrible overall CPU performance.
Computerbase has the 288V at 127 pts in Cinebench 2024 in ST.
Computerbase has the X1E-84-100 at 127 pts.

So significantly behind is not accurate when referencing ST. At least in Cinebench.

And it’s been known the whole time that LNL wasn’t targeting MT performance.
 
Reactions: Tlh97

mikegg

Golden Member
Jan 30, 2010
1,847
471
136
Computerbase has the 288V at 127 pts in Cinebench 2024 in ST.
Computerbase has the X1E-84-100 at 127 pts.

So significantly behind is not accurate when referencing ST. At least in Cinebench.

And it’s been known the whole time that LNL wasn’t targeting MT performance.
Cinebench R24 ST (Notebookcheck):

* M3: 12.7 points/watt, 141 score
* X Elite: 8.3 points/watt, 123 score
* Intel Ultra 7 258V: 5.36 points/watt, 120 score
* AMD HX 370: 3.74 points/watt, 116 score
* AMD 8845HS: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score
* Intel 155H: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score

Taken at these power levels, X Elite has 54% more perf/watt while also 2.5% faster in ST. LNL has horrendous ST efficiency while also being on a better node. When AMD had these numbers over Intel, everyone here was calling Intel as dead. Now that X Elite has these numbers of Intel and you're all saying X Elite is dead.

Cinebench R24 MT perf/watt (Notebookcheck):

* M3: 28.3 points/watt, 598 score
* X Elite: 22.6 points/watt, 1033 score
* AMD HX 370: 19.7 points/watt, 1213 score
* Intel Ultra 7 258V: 17.7 points/watt, 602 score
* AMD 8845HS: 14.8 points/watt, 912 score
* Intel 155H: 14.5 points/watt, 752 score

Taken at these power levels, X Elite has 27.7% more perf/watt while also being a whopping 71.6% faster.

LNL CPU is a disaster.

Battery life of Dell XPS 13 (PC World Youtube Review):

* X Elite: 1,168 minutes, performance of 204,333 in Procyon
* LNL: 1,253 minutes in, performance of 123,000 Procyon

Battery life test with performance figures backs Cinebench results. LNL has 7% more battery life but X Elite has 65% more performance while on battery.
 
Last edited:

jdubs03

Senior member
Oct 1, 2013
950
594
136
Cinebench R24 ST (Notebookcheck):

* M3: 12.7 points/watt, 141 score
* X Elite: 9.3 points/watt, 123 score
* Intel Ultra 7 258V: 5.36 points/watt, 120 score
* AMD HX 370: 3.74 points/watt, 116 score
* AMD 8845HS: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score
* Intel 155H: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score

Taken at these power levels, X Elite has 72.9% more perf/watt while also 2.5% faster.

Cinebench R24 MT perf/watt (Notebookcheck):

* M3: 28.3 points/watt, 598 score
* X Elite: 22.6 points/watt, 1033 score
* AMD HX 370: 19.7 points/watt, 1213 score
* Intel Ultra 7 258V: 17.7 points/watt, 602 score
* AMD 8845HS: 14.8 points/watt, 912 score
* Intel 155H: 14.5 points/watt, 752 score

Taken at these power levels, X Elite has 27.7% more perf/watt while also being a whopping 71.6% faster.
Indeed. But that is not the point I’m making.

The U7 258V is not the highest SKU; the U9 288V is, which scored 127 points.
You said overall single-thread performance; not perf/watt, or IPC. That’s all.

Everything else you said is verified by the data.
 
Reactions: Tlh97

mikegg

Golden Member
Jan 30, 2010
1,847
471
136
Indeed. But that is not the point I’m making.

The U7 258V is not the highest SKU; the U9 288V is, which scored 127 points.
You said overall single-thread performance; not perf/watt, or IPC. That’s all.

Everything else you said is verified by the data.

1T is similar in performance to X Elite. However, efficiency wise, LNL is terrible. That's my main point.
Efficiency numbers don’t look good for LNL.

I don't know how anyone can say LNL's CPU is good. It's absolutely terrible for N3B and its raw performance is severely lacking.
 

jdubs03

Senior member
Oct 1, 2013
950
594
136
1T is similar in performance to X Elite. However, efficiency wise, LNL is terrible. That's my main point.


I don't know how anyone can say LNL's CPU is good. It's absolutely terrible for N3B and its raw performance is severely lacking.
Where did you get the X Elite - 9.3 pts/W. The X84 scored 127, the X80 scored 123.

I only see this:
 

mikegg

Golden Member
Jan 30, 2010
1,847
471
136
Where did you get the X Elite - 9.3 pts/W. The X84 scored 127, the X80 scored 123.

I only see this:
View attachment 108706
I think I got it from their Youtube video originally:

I might have mistaken 8.3 as 9.3 or I found another source.

Let's just assume it's 8.3. That's still 54% more efficient than LNL.

I edited my post to reflect 8.3.
 

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
991
682
106
Cinebench R24 ST (Notebookcheck):

* M3: 12.7 points/watt, 141 score
* X Elite: 8.3 points/watt, 123 score
* Intel Ultra 7 258V: 5.36 points/watt, 120 score
* AMD HX 370: 3.74 points/watt, 116 score
* AMD 8845HS: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score
* Intel 155H: 3.1 points/watt, 102 score

Taken at these power levels, X Elite has 54% more perf/watt while also 2.5% faster in ST. LNL has horrendous ST efficiency while also being on a better node. When AMD had these numbers over Intel, everyone here was calling Intel as dead. Now that X Elite has these numbers of Intel and you're all saying X Elite is dead.

Cinebench R24 MT perf/watt (Notebookcheck):

* M3: 28.3 points/watt, 598 score
* X Elite: 22.6 points/watt, 1033 score
* AMD HX 370: 19.7 points/watt, 1213 score
* Intel Ultra 7 258V: 17.7 points/watt, 602 score
* AMD 8845HS: 14.8 points/watt, 912 score
* Intel 155H: 14.5 points/watt, 752 score

Taken at these power levels, X Elite has 27.7% more perf/watt while also being a whopping 71.6% faster.

LNL CPU is a disaster.

Battery life of Dell XPS 13 (PC World Youtube Review):

* X Elite: 1,168 minutes, performance of 204,333 in Procyon
* LNL: 1,253 minutes in, performance of 123,000 Procyon

Battery life test with performance figures backs Cinebench results. LNL has 7% more battery life but X Elite has 65% more performance while on battery.
Noticed the same thing — all of the indications we have other than the Geekerwan video comparing the GB16 (and using Linux) — where Andrei said the power measurements are off due to Linux — suggest LNL is pretty crappy for the area and doesn’t even live up to that much performance for the whole lineup either.

If Qualcomm were on N3B they’d be shipping 3.8-4.2GHz baseline I think, with their IPC advantage.

Intel can barely even match the M3’s ST and at like ~ twice the power, and that’s only on a specific SKU despite N3B, similar area, on-package memory, plenty of CPU area….



I predicted a lot of this here months ago. It doesn’t even match M2 ST perf/W (also alluded to that lol).

Just not that impressive. Intel design is mediocre.
 
Reactions: KompuKare

SpudLobby

Senior member
May 18, 2022
991
682
106
Even if you took the Geekerwan VRM seriously where it’s the GB16 & on Linux — they trade blows on ST between FP & Int and the Int advantage is not too big.




But I am pretty confident it’s bad data for what we want to know. Andrei F says as much and they are using the GB16 on Linux for Qualcomm — and those power floors are not low enough for QC’s mobo in other systems on Windows, it wouldn’t make sense.

Almost every other piece of evidence we have on these two where battery is similar ish, and the single best comparison we have — the same platform with the XPS 9345 — if anything Qualcomm pulls out in these tests for bursty mixed workloads like intermittent web browsing rundowns, and the video playback for both is reported in the upper 20’s. So I would take Geekerwan’s nadir lows with caution as it pertaibs to the X Elite vs LNL in most systems (or good ones?) & on Windows.


 

Attachments

  • IMG_8142.png
    717 KB · Views: 0
Reactions: Racan and FlameTail

FlameTail

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2021
4,095
2,465
106
Noticed the same thing — all of the indications we have other than the Geekerwan video
That's the queer thing I noticed too. Geekerwan's findings don't seem to align with those from other reviewers. There definitely is some error in the data- atleast in the SPEC2017 power curves. Geekerwan's next review video after Lunar Lake is said to be X Elite itself, so perhaps the errors might get rectified in that video.
Geekbench 16? Are you from the future?
 
Reactions: Doug S
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |