I wish more tech outlets knew about benchmarking developer workloads, Chromium compile time is such an irrelevant benchmark. Benchmarking the time to make a clean release build of an incredibly large C++ code base, especially one with tons of time dedicated to making the build as parallel as possible, isn’t at all representative of what 99% of programmers do in their day to day. I work on a large cpp codebase every day and it’s been months since I’ve done a clean release build on my local machine.

A substantially better test methodology would be to checkout to a commit 30 or so back, do a clean build and running of the test suite to populate caches, and then time the total duration it takes to run the test suite until you land back on the latest commit. Most programmers don’t do clean builds unless they absolutely have to and they’ll have build caches populated. Do this for an array of languages with projects of varying sizes and then you’ll have a benchmark actually worth looking at.

Best way to make money during a gold rush is to sell shovels.

For sure. It was specified that the 12 core chip in question was the 1360p which is substantially less efficient than the Qualcomm chip. It’s likely M3 Max will be faster than the Snapdragon X elite but double the power consumption for worse performance is false.

The M2 in the iPad Pro scores 2480 in GB6 ST vs 2325 for the 8g3 in a phone with an inferior cooling solution, that’s a 6% lead for M2. That’s definitely within the same ballpark. Alongside Qualcomm’s bold performance claims from the oryon presentation there’s no reason to believe they’ll be substantially behind Apple in laptops for ST, at least against the current M2 generation.

Apple has been having minor clock speed improvements with low single digit IPC increases every generation since A14, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to look at the trajectory of Qualcomm and Apple to determine what’ll happen if these trends don’t change. Unless A18 bucks that trend of minor improvement Qualcomm will be ahead, especially considering they’ll be using oryon based cores.

I’d much rather companies focus on 1600p @ 120hz than 4k at these kinds of screen sizes, it’s frustrating how many non-gaming devices avoid them when even MacBook Pros have a high refresh rate screen nowadays.