[FootballMuse]

Passmark is an outdated benchmark not well optimized for ARM. Even so the single thread marks are 3864 (AI365) vs 4550 (M4)

OTOH, Geekbench correlates (0.99) with SPEC standards, the industry standard in CPU benchmark and what enterprise companies such as AWS use to judge a CPU performance.

https://medium.com/silicon-reimagined/performance-delivered-...

[satellite2]

I see you are citing a 6 month old post which itself isn't really well sourced isn't really reaching consensus and doesn't have a definitive answer.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43287208

The article in question doesn't mention subpar ARM optimizations.

[astrange]

Hmm, why would you need to optimize a benchmark for something? Generally it's the other way round.

[aleph_minus_one]

> Hmm, why would you need to optimize a benchmark for something? Generally it's the other way round.

It had always been both ways. This is why there exist(ed) quite a lot of people who have/had serious thoughts whether [some benchmark] actually measures the performance of the e.g. CPU or the quality of the compiler.

The "truce" that was adopted concerning these very heated discussions was that a great CPU is of much less value if programmers are incapable of making use of its power.

Examples that evidence the truth of this "truce" [pun intended]:

- Sega Saturn (very hard to make use of its power)

- PlayStation 3 (Cell processor)

- Intel Itanium, which (besides some other problems) needed a super-smart compiler (which never existed) so that programs could make use of its potential

- in the last years: claims that specific AMD GPUs are as fast as or even faster than NVidia GPUs (also: for the same cost) for GPGPU tasks. Possibly true, but CUDA makes it easier to make use of the power of the NVidia GPU.