Compared to its actual rivals - AMD's Ryzen Threadripper Pro W5995X and Intel's Xeon W9-3495X - it easily beats them in single-thread workloads but is dramatically slower when more cores are needed. Intel's desktop offering supports simultaneous multi-threading and can process up to 32 threads instantly. This is why the benchmark result shows Apple's M2 Ultra cannot beat Intel's Core i9-13900K in single-thread workloads and even fall behind in multi-core workloads in Geekbench 5. While two M2 Maxes look formidable on paper, they cannot boast clocks of Intel's Core i9-13900K or the core count of AMD's Ryzen Threadripper Pro W5995WX.ĨP+16E/32T, 3.0 GHz - 5.80 GHz, 68MB L2+元 cache It was also not designed for an extreme core count because of power and cooling limitations. Instead of boosting clocks to extremes when a computationally heavy workload emerges, M2 uses built-in special-purpose accelerators. M2 Max was not exactly architected for high clocks or for expandability, as you can only install so much memory and so much storage in a compact PC. Those workstations have moderate power consumption and do not support expandability. When it comes to Apple's M2 Ultra, it consists of two M2 Max system-on-chips that were designed primarily for MacBook Pro and Mac Studio machines. In a nutshell, they use server silicon configured to offer extremely high clocks when needed. AMD's Ryzen Threadripper Pro W5995X and Intel's Xeon W9-3495X comply with these requirements with their 64 and 56 cores, respectively. This means that they must feature high instruction-per-clock performance, high clocks, high core count, support for loads of memory, and feature loads of PCIe lanes. Heavy-duty workstation-grade processors are different from desktop and server CPUs in that they should deliver both very responsive performance (like all client processors) and consistently high performance under heavy workloads.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |