Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: "Performance king"
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 13:16:13 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <vge1ut$1n104$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vgb0hp$122je$1@dont-email.me> <vgb3g3$10e0f$3@dont-email.me>
 <vgb5mq$122je$9@dont-email.me> <vge1k7$1n2vk$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 22:16:14 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8506d21e72927ce35ea55bd2c74d4098";
	logging-data="1803268"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19PyVdX6zdTn9ZMj3EQzG/1Z1JuIq/v4/c="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XhPbvhuLUOfQBN5LceDjqWyCukA=
In-Reply-To: <vge1k7$1n2vk$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-CA
Bytes: 3304

On 2024-11-05 13:10, Tom Elam wrote:
> On 11/4/2024 2:01 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-11-04 10:24, Tom Elam wrote:
>>> On 11/4/2024 12:33 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> 'Apple's M4 Max is the single-core performance king in Geekbench 6 — 
>>>> M4 Max beats the Core Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 9 9950X
>>>>
>>>> All that power is in a small package.'
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/apples-m4-max-is- 
>>>> the- single-core-performance-king-in-geekbench-6-m4-max-beats-the- 
>>>> core- ultra-9-285k-and-ryzen-9-9950x>
>>>>
>>>> 'On the x86 end, AMD and Intel pale in contrast. The M4 Max handily 
>>>> keeps up even in multi-core at a fraction of the power—beating 
>>>> Intel's Core Ultra 9 285K by around 19% in the single-core category 
>>>> and 16% in the multi-core category. Compared to the Ryzen 9 9950X, 
>>>> the M4 Max showed 18% higher single-core performance and 25% higher 
>>>> multi-core performance.'
>>>>
>>>> But there are those who believe that Apple is terrible at chip design.
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Could Apple be a reason Nvidia CPU tech may kill off Intel's laptop 
>>> CICS CPU line.
>>
>> You're hilarious when you tried to pretend you're not ignorant.
>>
>> "CICS" is short for "Customer Information Control System"; and IBM 
>> middleware layer between their mainframe OSs and business applications.
>>
>> I know this, because at various points in my parents careers, they 
>> both work on CICS systems.
>>
>> The acronym you were groping for was "CISC", which is short for 
>> "Complex Instruction Set Computer".
>>
>> CISC is a design philosophy of CPU design where there are many—complex 
>> —CPU instructions built into the architecture, and was in contrast to 
>> "RISC" (REDUCED Instruction Set Computer), but the distinction has 
>> been made moot as the decades since it was a debate about which is 
>> better have passed.
>>
>> And why would what Apple does have any impact on what Nvidia CPU 
>> technology might do to Intel's CPUs?
> 
> So I transposed a letter. CICS was the intent. Not like you NEVER had a 
> typo.

And yet you did it again, when you should have been particularly 
attentive to the issue.