苹果M5 Max真的“击败”96核Threadripper吗?
Does Apple‘s M5 Max Really “Destroy” a 96-Core Threadripper?

原始链接: https://slashdot.org/submission/17345398/does-apples-m5-max-really-destroy-a-96-core-threadripper

厄瓜多尔写道:Tom's Hardware 目前在其首页刊登了一篇文章,对 18 核 Apple M5 Max 与 96 核 Ryzen Threadripper 做出了一些令人震惊的声明。阅读这篇文章,可以发现该比较主要基于 Geekbench 6 的多核得分。作者简要提到 Geekbench 扩展性不好,但并没有明确说明扩展性究竟有多差。 根据我自己的工作经验,与之前的版本不同,Geekbench 6 的多核测试对于大型 CPU 来说基本上毫无用处。该测试套件中的一些测试(包括通常可以高度并行化的工作负载)在超过 4-8 个核心后停止扩展,并且随着核心数量的增加,总分实际上可能会下降。 我去年写了一篇关于这个问题的更详细的分析。 这是否是大型科技网站的新低点,基于如此不恰当的基准测试而发布耸人听闻的标题,还是这已经成为常态?

相关文章

原文
Ecuador writes: Tom's Hardware currently has a front-page article making some wild claims about the 18-core Apple M5 Max versus a 96-core Ryzen Threadripper.

Reading the article, the comparison is based largely on Geekbench 6 multi-core scores. The author briefly mentions that Geekbench doesn't scale well, but doesn't really make clear just how bad the scaling actually is.

From my own experience doing cloud benchmarking for work, unlike previous versions, Geekbench 6 multi-core is essentially useless for large CPUs. Some of the suite's tests (including workloads that are normally very parallelizable) stop scaling beyond 4-8 cores, and the overall score can actually start dropping as you add more and more cores.

I wrote a more detailed breakdown of the issue last year.

Is this a new low for a major tech site, running sensational headlines based on such inappropriate benchmarking, or is this just the new normal?

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com