For PC gaming news and discussion.
PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
- 1 user online
- 92 users / day
- 385 users / week
- 1.15K users / month
- 3.27K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 7.19K Posts
- 58.4K Comments
- Modlog
There’s really not much of an advantage in efficiency with ARM anymore, but there is a huge loss in peak performance.
Do you have any studies for that? From what I can tell phones and portable devices are all running ARM and even small laptops have been switching to ARM.
There isn’t really any inherent part about ARM that is more power efficient that x86 can’t really achieve if they really want to. You’re not gonna find studies on this because it’s not really something you can make studies on about but you can read up on CPU architecture design, CISC vs RISC debates to see that the reason why ARM seems to be more power efficient is due to a bunch of other reasons. Chips and Cheese has a really good article on this but it gets very technical.
Could also look at AMD’s Z series CPUs and Intel’s Lunar Lake and upcoming Panther Lake processors.
Not scientific ones,but they shouldn’t be necessary. Look up the Panther Lake battery tests.