AMD Claims Its Top-Tier Ryzen AI Chip Is Faster Than Apple's M3 Pro 42
AMD has introduced its latest Ryzen AI chips, built on the new Zen 5 architecture, in an ambitious attempt to compete with Apple's dominant MacBook processors. During a recent two-day event in Los Angeles, the company made bold claims about outperforming Apple's M3 and M3 Pro chips in various tasks including multitasking, image processing, and gaming, though these assertions remain unverified due to limited demonstrations and benchmarks provided at the event, The Verge reports. The report adds: At that event, I heard AMD brag about beating the MacBook more than I've ever heard a company directly target a competitor before. AMD claimed its new Ryzen chip "exceeds the performance of what MacBook Air has to offer in multitasking, image processing, 3D rendering, and gaming"; "is 15 percent faster than the M3 Pro" in Cinebench; and is capable of powering up to four displays, "unlike the MacBook Air, which limits you to two displays only." While AMD touted significant improvements in CPU architecture, graphics performance, and AI capabilities, journalists present at the event were unable to fully test or validate these features, leaving many questions unanswered about the chips' real-world performance.
The company's reluctance or inability to showcase certain capabilities, particularly in gaming and AI applications, has raised eyebrows among industry observers, the report adds. The new Ryzen AI chips are scheduled to debut in Asus laptops on July 28th, marking a critical juncture for AMD in the fiercely competitive laptop processor market. As Apple's M-series chips and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors continue to gain traction in the mobile computing space, the success or failure of AMD's latest offering could have far-reaching implications for the future of x86 architecture in laptops.
The company's reluctance or inability to showcase certain capabilities, particularly in gaming and AI applications, has raised eyebrows among industry observers, the report adds. The new Ryzen AI chips are scheduled to debut in Asus laptops on July 28th, marking a critical juncture for AMD in the fiercely competitive laptop processor market. As Apple's M-series chips and Qualcomm's Snapdragon processors continue to gain traction in the mobile computing space, the success or failure of AMD's latest offering could have far-reaching implications for the future of x86 architecture in laptops.
Re: If you buy an AMD chip... (Score:5, Insightful)
The 2000s called, they want their meme back. These days it is Intel that is cooking PCs, when Nvidia isn't doing it with a power connector.
Re: (Score:3)
That Intel chip with the reported stability issues has a dissipation of over 200 watts.
Re: (Score:1)
Proof that you don't know what you're talking about.
And the Intel chip has engineering problems.
AMD? Apples and oranges. Does it run warm? YES. But the single fan cooling solutions can deal with the heat from the chip. WITHOUT CUTTING POWER BUDGET.
So. Try again.
Re: (Score:2)
Proof that you don't know what you're talking about.
The comment to which you replied was pointing out that the Intel chip in question has sizable power consumption, which I see as supporting my statement.
And the Intel chip has engineering problems.
Well, it does say Intel right on it. Aren't they known for engineering problems now, at least among nerds? Though I am seeing fewer and fewer posts by non-nerds (they are just gamers, who can also be nerds, but from the comment content I can tell the relevant parties are not — this is mostly on Faceboot) defending Intel, and more complaining about them
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a group effort. Those connectors are not the best one Molex makes for doing that job. They shouldn't even be in the spec to begin with, not on the supply or demand end.
Re: (Score:2)
It's actually Intel CPUs that are power hogs these days. AMD are the more efficient option.
Faster at what, precisely? (Score:1, Insightful)
Also: as if 'benchmarks' are anything other than sewage themselves.
FFS just produce fast, efficient processors and never mind this shitty 'AI' nonsense.
Re: Faster at what, precisely? (Score:5, Interesting)
Slow down. It isn't an "AI" benchmark.
AMD claimed its new Ryzen chip "exceeds the performance of what MacBook Air has to offer in multitasking, image processing, 3D rendering, and gaming"; "is 15 percent faster than the M3 Pro"
Re: Faster at what, precisely? (Score:4, Informative)
Comparing to the macbook air, the lowest model of macbook with passive cooling, and the m3 pro which is a mid tier chip.
Also comparing an upcoming product with one that's already on the way out, a comparison with M4 would be more apt.
Re: Faster at what, precisely? (Score:2)
Reading between the lines, we can expect that it does not exceed an M4.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody currently knows for sure how this AMD chip compares to the unreleased M4, but I think it's telling that AMD did not claim that their new chip is faster than the M3 Max.
Re: (Score:2)
The M4 is not unreleased, you can buy the base model M4 in an ipad today.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but the overall solution isn't equivalent to a laptop. Thermals and other supporting details are different for a tablet.
Doesn't matter (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I was just lloking for a place to comment this: When you run on sub 1% of the machines in the world and your code needs to be custom compiled to run on your custom hardware, on your niche operating system, with weird developer hoops to jump through, who the fuck cares about your CPU? an intel atom is more useful to your average person than an M3. at least it can run the majority of software out there you can throw at it.
This Siloing and fragmenting of the market is useful to NO ONE
Re: (Score:2)
It's a dick measuring contest, pure specmanship. Every year Apple claims to be the best, every year AMD claims to be the best, every year Intel claims to be the best, and now Qualcomm is getting in on it too.
Apple has its own silicon, MS now has Qualcomm (Score:2)
I imagine the board rooms of both Intel and AMD are full of old guys sweating bullets, worrying about their stock portfolios.
Re: Apple has its own silicon, MS now has Qualcomm (Score:3)
Nobody thinks MS is clever enough to attempt vertical integration. Nor could they legally pull it off. Ultimately Microsoft wants to collect service contracts and sell software. They are more like Google's Android that both makes its own hardware but also has lots of partner OEMs.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody thinks MS is clever enough to attempt vertical integration. Nor could they legally pull it off. Ultimately Microsoft wants to collect service contracts and sell software. They are more like Google's Android that both makes its own hardware but also has lots of partner OEMs.
MS has been trying since the Surface [wikipedia.org] in 2012 with their latest offering Surface with CoPilot [microsoft.com]. Their attempts have not been as successful as Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
actually, it goes back (at least) to their Z80 card for the Apple ][.
Re: (Score:3)
I would imagine that they are not. Well, at least not at Apple.
So AMD managed to show some cherry-picked numbers of their hand-picked parts with bespoke tuning beating one of Apple's lowest-end mass-manufactured parts. Whoopie. I'd bet it blows away an iPad too!
But how long can it do that? Does the battery last as long as a Macbook Air while having all that performance?
Next do MacBook Pro and see where you end up. And when you actually start shipping these in quantity, Apple will probably be releasing
Re: Apple has its own silicon, MS now has Qualcomm (Score:2)
Actually, Apple already released the M4 and an iPad with the M4. So yeah, that one probably already wins.
Re: (Score:2)
Doubt it. No matter what, Intel and AMD are not really in the same market as Apple. Both companies make money hand over fist, not just the gaming rigs, but the server market and the desktop market. It is easier for them to sell 10,000 CPUs/machines/servers to one person than to sell one machine to 10,000 people.
Apple sells an ecosystem. Intel and AMD sell CPUs and hardware.
Of course, there is one thing Apple has... and that is the fact that their CPUs have need for less cooling than the average Intel/AM
at 3x the power consumption (Score:1)
...and right after Apple has started releaseing M4 (Score:3)
People won't switch computers for a processor that's slightly more powerful in some places than the outgoing generation -- on a different platform.
Apple wont use AMD processors.
Apple Processors cannot be used in any machine not made by Apple.
I'd think if AMD was on the right track with this marketing, we'd all switch to RISC-V because it's more open source.
Re: ...and right after Apple has started releasein (Score:2)
I just switched to an M3 Max MacBook Pro, from a last-gen Intel one, and on AI workloads (image processing with a trained model), the difference is stunning. And the M3 Max battery life is phenomenal.
I'm told that moving from Intel to any Apple ARM-based silicon is a no brainer. M2 to M3, not so much.
So you have an opportunity to do an 'Apple-to-Apple' real workload comparison of Intel and Apple silicon.
I'm no Apple fanboi - I like Macs, hate iPhones, hate much of the recent change to macOS; it's not like A
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The M3/M4 are midrange chips. You know, they meet or beat the midrange CPUs made by Intel and AMD - the Core i5s and Ryzen 5 type chips.
If you want performance, the i7 or i8s or high end Ryzens would beat Apple's ARM chips in a heartbeat.
So yes, hearing that AMD's latest and greatest flagship chip is faster than Apple's chip was always true - they always have and in no way could Apple touch the performance. They never came close.
So yes, AMD's latest and greatest chip beats Apple's. That's to be expected. A
Re: (Score:2)
I'd think if AMD was on the right track with this marketing, we'd all switch to RISC-V because it's more open source.
Switching architectures comes with difficulties. There are no RISC-V processors this performant yet. That may come with time, but it will not happen soon. Also, most GPUs which aren't from AMD or Nvidia are much slower than theirs. RISC-V GPUs are coming along, but they have a ways to go as well. There are various approaches being attempted e.g. https://www.tomshardware.com/p... [tomshardware.com] and who knows which will might turn out to be the next thing... eventually.
But Apple has already built (or encouraged the building
You can make everything faster (Score:3, Informative)
Just make it bigger and consume more power, you can beat any metric:
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X “Zen 5” CPU has a peak TDP of 54W
Apple M3 Pro has a peak TDP of 30W
That is a near 2x in power consumption, for a 15% benchmark improvement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The article says 15w more than m3, the 9950X tdp is 170w. so it's a different chip referenced.
Battery life? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
AMD's battery life seems to be comparable to Apple's these days. The CPU is only a small part of it. Most of the time the CPU is idle, either sat at a more or less static screen, or waiting for the GPU to decide some video. A larger part of the power consumption is the screen, and what web browser you are using (Chrome is very efficient). Somewhat depends on the OS too, as certain systems aggressively kill off background tasks.
If you look at AMD powered machines from Lenovo, they are quoting 20+ hour batter
At least it's launching in 2 weeks (Score:3)
with more pci-e lanes and more max ram! (Score:2)
with more pci-e lanes and more max ram!
Isn't this a given? (Score:2)
Mac processors are in low power notebooks, a 200W cpu could mop the floor with it. Even previous generations.
Meanwhile, Apple releases the M4 chip.... (Score:2)