In reply to a post by TinyMongomery:

Average consumption of my (ancient) SurfaceBook (Intel CPU) is 36W - that includes the screen. Average consumption of a Mini M1 (ignoring the display) is 39W (50W for an M2 mini).

Some commentators suggested the new Mini is now 'catching up' with where the NUC form factor has gone; as the M1 and M2 Mac Mini chassis was mostly empty. What is surprising is no Qualcomm CPU in a NUC or similar small form factor to use as desktop.

Just comparing battery autonomy laptop to laptop (similar vintages) have here. Line ball on price, about £1,800 each.

2024 ThinkPad X13 2-in-1 Gen5. Runs an Intel Ultra 7 165U vPro Processor (E-cores up to 3.80 GHz + P-cores up to 4.90 GHz) with 32GB RAM and 2TB SSD. Battery is 4 cell Li-Polymer 54.7Wh capacity

2024 MacBook Air M3. Runs an Apple M3 8-core CPU (4 performance cores + 4 efficiency cores), 10-core GPU with 24GB RAM and 1TB SSD. Battery is Li-Polymer 52.6Wh capacity

They are both small, lightweight 13-inch machines, released this year. Both very nice in their own ways.

However for battery performance / autonomy, the MacBook absolutely smashes it. Can often get 2+ DAYS of usage between charges on the MBA. On the little ThinkPad you're doing extremely well to push it to out to last the day.

They're in a different league. Just no comparison.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

They're in a different league. Just no comparison.

On battery life the mac is insanely good, but I think there is more coming from Intel, and of course Qualcomm's stuff, available in a X1 I believe. Apple woke them up, and they're now chasing... this is fun, especially for those whom use software that just doesn't work on Mac.

I will wait with bated breath for Intel especially to get anywhere near close.

Intel are a bit like Boeing at the moment - rested far too long on their laurels and decades of coveting their incumbent 'golden eggs', whilst a series of poorly thought out strategic mis-steps, coupled with poor stewardship and governance have put them in a tight spot.

They don't quite have the fork in them yet, but they aren't miles off. I hope their latest idea of splitting the manufacturing side of the company from the design side bears them fruit, otherwise their stock price will just plummet even further into the mud.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

They don't quite have the fork in them yet, but they aren't miles off. I hope their latest idea of splitting the manufacturing side of the company from the design side bears them fruit, otherwise their stock price will just plummet even further into the mud.

Agreed, their business is now enterprise and cloud data centre; and corporate desktop PCs that can't run on ARM architecture.. but with qualcomm's legal spat with ARM Ltd, and no sign of any small Qualcomm powered desktop ... there is still a lot of need for x86, and AMD can't fill the entire hole alone.

Intel lost the performance x86 desktop and high-end server crown to AMD years ago.

Nvidia has just taken Intel's place in the Dow Jones industrial index. Nvidia dominate the AI chip market, where Intel basically have no viable product experience. Its a market that Intel *completely* missed.

In terms of leading-edge fab capability, Intel have floundered for the best part of a decade. They are hoping and praying that the 18A process will deliver them salvation. Meanwhile TSMC eats their lunch on 5nm process for years and now 3nm process.

ARM designs via Apple and Qualcomm, have completely dominated the mobile market for a decade and a half and now their superior performance to energy chip designs for desktop make Intel chips look VERY outdated.

Intel faces so many challenges from so many multi-faceted competitors, I struggle to see how they will turn things around without HUGE support from Uncle Sam. They have ridden the x86 train to the end of the line.

Edit - I completely forgot about that tiny little South Korean concern called Samsung. I suppose it's putting the boot in, but those of us that remember how successful Intel once was in memory technology, can only now wince at how Intel TOTALLY ceded their crown to Samsung.

Poor old Intel. It's not looking good. Really not.

Edited by Pheasant (Sat 02-Nov-24 21:16:06)

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Intel lost the performance x86 desktop and high-end server crown to AMD years ago.

On consumer desktop, but in total PC market they only had around 10%, appealing to gamers, but not of interest to the corporate big box shifters like Dell. (e.g. call centre high volume PCs). In many cases corporate software is using one or two cores, whereas AMD went after the game market where many many more slower cores provided better performance. Intel made less cores that could run faster. Both options quite useful to have depending on the workload you want to run.

Nvidia has just taken Intel's place in the Dow Jones industrial index. Nvidia dominate the AI chip market, where Intel basically have no viable product experience. Its a market that Intel *completely* missed.

In terms of leading-edge fab capability, Intel have floundered for the best part of a decade. They are hoping and praying that the 18A process will deliver them salvation. Meanwhile TSMC eats their lunch on 5nm process for years and now 3nm process.

Agreed, Intel's fabrication division missed the future. As IBM's did 20 years ago, and IBM offloaded fabrication to Global Foundries. Maybe Intel will split. Intel didn't see AI coming, but have an NPU that competes with Apple's M3/M4 and Qualcomm's Snapdragon Elite. The rest of the microprocessor industry missed what NVidia achieved; including AMD whom decades ago were able to compete.

ARM designs via Apple and Qualcomm, have completely dominated the mobile market for a decade and a half and now their superior performance to energy chip designs for desktop make Intel chips look VERY outdated.

ARM Holding's lawsuit of Qualcomm just launched may torpedo the industry love of ARM... this will ricochet, and the implications of this could hurt the likes of Apple, and even Mediatek etc.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/arm-...

Intel faces so many challenges from so many multi-faceted competitors, I struggle to see how they will turn things around without HUGE support from Uncle Sam. They have ridden the x86 train to the end of the line.

Almost no corporate data centre yet has ARM technology, and in AWS and Azure whilst there are ARM EC2/VMs available, the cloud operators report less than 10% of workloads on them (even with lower price). Corporates are seriously conservative, it will be interesting to see if there is any shift in corporate and cloud chips. Who makes ARM chips for enterprise use other than AWS's own Annapurna labs? Very low volume.

ARM's lawsuit of Qualcomm may have just energised interest in RISCV.

Edit - I completely forgot about that tiny little South Korean concern called Samsung. I suppose it's putting the boot in, but those of us that remember how successful Intel once was in memory technology, can only now wince at how Intel TOTALLY ceded their crown to Samsung.

and SKhynix..

Poor old Intel. It's not looking good. eally not.

Agree, Pat Gelsinger was too little too late as CEO. There is some useful and interesting technology, maybe it will end up in AMD's or someone elses hands.

Intel have some good people whom can make some fascinating products, using TSMC to fabricate, they may beat Qualcomm Nuvia's ARM architecture. That doesn't mean the existing business isn't broken.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/inte...

Its at this point I miss Anandtech, and Anand Shimapi.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

On consumer desktop, but in total PC market they only had around 10%, appealing to gamers, but not of interest to the corporate big box shifters like Dell. (e.g. call centre high volume PCs). In many cases corporate software is using one or two cores, whereas AMD went after the game market where many many more slower cores provided better performance. Intel made less cores that could run faster. Both options quite useful to have depending on the workload you want to run.

AMD and Intel just announced a few weeks ago that they would be collaborating on the x86 Ecosystem Advisory Group. Basically they will in lockstep develop and foster together the architecture and standards interfaces for x86...

"The advisory group aims to unite industry leaders to shape the future of x86 and foster developer innovation through a more unified set of instructions and architectural interfaces. This initiative will enhance compatibility, predictability and consistency across x86 product offerings. To achieve this, the group will solicit technical input from the x86 hardware and software communities on essential functions and features. Collaboration will facilitate the creation of consistent and compatible implementations of key x86 architectural features and programming models, extending across all sectors – including data centers, cloud, client, edge and embedded devices – ultimately delivering downstream benefits to customers..."

So looks like on one level at least AMD and Intel will be collaborating ever-closer than at any time in their tumultuous history. I guess when your new, real enemies are banging at the gates (ARM, Nvidia and Risc-V et al) your old x86 enemy / foe become your new best mate!

One school of thought is, that Intel could go into so called "run-off" mode - to quote a recent article in the FT;

"It could slash most of its operating cost base, concede AI and other innovation to others and simply harvest and return the cash it would get from selling tens of billions in dollars of outdated but necessary semiconductors — though a little bit less every year."

In other words Intel could just trim up, milk its existing x86 business for all its worth, and just keep turning the handle and passing go until it the revenue eventually fades into oblivion....i

ARM Holding's lawsuit of Qualcomm just launched may torpedo the industry love of ARM... this will ricochet, and the implications of this could hurt the likes of Apple, and even Mediatek etc.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/arm-...

I'm not sure that much will come of it. Bit of a storm in a teacup. Very likely they will put their guns down in the final run up to trial and simply settle like most multi-billion corporates with high stakes end up doing. Much as what happened between Apple and Qualcomm a few years ago and loads of other disputes of similar ilk over the years in this industry. At the end of day it's another spin of how much of the revenue pie will you take / I give. The chances of Qualcomm chucking it all in and shifting en masse to Risc-V are pretty remote in my view.

Agree, Pat Gelsinger was too little too late as CEO. There is some useful and interesting technology, maybe it will end up in AMD's or someone elses hands.

Intel have some good people whom can make some fascinating products, using TSMC to fabricate, they may beat Qualcomm Nuvia's ARM architecture. That doesn't mean the existing business isn't broken.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/inte...

Doubtless there is still good talent at Intel (though they leaked plenty in recent years as things have gone pear shaped for them). Uncle Sam wants to keep strategic semiconductor fab capability within the realms of the continental USA and Intel remains the standard bearer of the US semiconductor industry. Even though TSMC and Samsung, SK Hynix etc are setting up shop on US soil, Trump is making (ridiculous as usual) claims "You know, Taiwan, they stole our chip business, okay?" and not paying the US protection money!! - the geopolitics are all pretty crazy.

Either way its going to be an interesting few years....

Interesting, and one to watch. I think we should probaby take this to another fora too.

YouTube: M4 Mac Mini vs Intel and AMD Flagships