The original title “Apple M5 chip smashes Snapdragon X2 Elite in early single-thread benchmarks — single core scores rival Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K and beat AMD’s 9950X3D, teasing multi-core potential of future variants” is misleading.
GB6 ST results:
Apple M5: 4,263 (MacBook)
Snapdragon X2 Elite: 4,080 (the result is likely misleading, as Qualcomm likes to post early results that can never be replicated in real world products, see the first X Elite results)
That being said 4,263 verses 4,080 is a mere 4.3% uplift, within the margin of error. I don’t how other people approach benchmarks, but I consider anything below 5% to be irrelevant. You want at least high single digit uplift or more realistically double digit uplift to notice a difference.
Tomshardware recently released a premium subscription. That’s fair, I think the best option is to pay directly for news sources. But, if you want people to pay you directly you must avoid these sort of scam-like, sensationalist headlines and show a measure of respect for your paying audience.
The original title “Apple M5 chip smashes Snapdragon X2 Elite in early single-thread benchmarks — single core scores rival Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K and beat AMD’s 9950X3D, teasing multi-core potential of future variants” is misleading.
GB6 ST results:
That being said 4,263 verses 4,080 is a mere 4.3% uplift, within the margin of error. I don’t how other people approach benchmarks, but I consider anything below 5% to be irrelevant. You want at least high single digit uplift or more realistically double digit uplift to notice a difference.
Tomshardware recently released a premium subscription. That’s fair, I think the best option is to pay directly for news sources. But, if you want people to pay you directly you must avoid these sort of scam-like, sensationalist headlines and show a measure of respect for your paying audience.
Yeah, “smashes” by 4.3% is funny as well.