The real surprise is that Apple had to resort to a custom SKU instead of using something like the 8500Y with significantly higher Turbo performance at 4.2 GHz. Even the 8200Y is better spec’d for CPU at 3.9 GHz although not as good for GPU.I'm surprised at why you are surprised.
It's the same architecture, and Geekbench tests take a few seconds to run so quite bursty. Max clock speeds are same between the two. The saying that most Intel chips don't run at Base is exaggerated when looking at their Y chips - it almost never runs at base. The 1.4 vs 1.6GHz doesn't matter.
Amberlake doesn't even use updated 14nm process either, its same as Kabylake.
I don't think the i5-8210Y will be better than the i7-7Y75 in anything.
I don't think the i5-8210Y will be better than the i7-7Y75 in anything.
Yield issues? I don’t remember any recent 14nm yield issues, perhaps you mean capacity?The real surprise is that Apple had to resort to a custom SKU instead of using something like the 8500Y with significantly higher Turbo performance at 4.2 GHz. Even the 8200Y is better spec’d for CPU at 3.9 GHz although not as good for GPU.
Is Intel still having yield issues?
The real surprise is that Apple had to resort to a custom SKU instead of using something like the 8500Y with significantly higher Turbo performance at 4.2 GHz. Even the 8200Y is better spec’d for CPU at 3.9 GHz although not as good for GPU.
It's yield issues, they need to figure out how to yield more than one chip from the same silicon area.Yield issues? I don’t remember any recent 14nm yield issues, perhaps you mean capacity?
Yeah, this fan aided i5-8210Y is performing about as expected, which is to say it is underwhelming.On a more serious note, taking a look at the benches above made me realize just how much the ultra low power chips needed that new node to be ready already.
It turns out Apple appears to have commissioned not just one, but TWO custom Amber Lake chips.
i7-8510Y: 4249 single-core, 8553 multi-core.
The multi-core to single core ratios in Geekbench 4 for the Y MacBooks range from about 1.8:1 to about 2.1:1, and usually is around 1.9:1.It's strange how its not faster in ST. It seems though if you organize results by top ST performance, the MT isn't at top, but works the other way if you organize it by MT performance.