I disagree with both of you— it depends on the characteristics of the ADC. It could be biased either way, though the Ars guy seems to have integrated a much higher sampling rate.
Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New cores (A15)
- Thread starter cmaier
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Different ADCs can sample different parts of the signal in one sample period. At a sample rate below the Nyquist rate, the sampling characteristics can bias the result. Looking at even Andreis’s data, the signal frequency may be too high for his sample rate (single point square waves everywhere), though that may only be the graphical representation. Anyway, a lower sampling frequency may cause the ADC to not integrate the average signal correctly.
I agree it can be *wrong* what I’m not sure is if it’s *biased* - as in consistently wrong in the same direction which is what is required here. (as opposed to wrong where some of his estimates are reporting too high values vs others that are reporting too low values) In other words he’s saying that he and others are consistently getting values such that the A15 is less efficient than the A14. If it were just down to too infrequent sampling - i thought it should be noisy such that the A15 sometimes in some tests pulls out too far ahead and sometimes the A15 loses. But the claim is the A15 is always less efficient. It’s also comparing results of two processors so no matter who is wrong the method would have to be more on one processor than the other. I feel something deeper than just sampling frequency must be going on but that could be part of it. Also I’ll admit that we’re hitting the depth of my knowledge here so there may be something about your argument I’m not getting.
Looking at the charts Andreis posted on twitter (while noting that they are on the same scale), the peak-to-peak variance is much greater. If the naysayer claimants are doing a sample-and-hold at the maximum value, with a low sampling rate, they'd inflate the power readings on the A15 more.
That said, with a second look at those charts, the A15 would probably still tie or win. So something is extra fishy about this. I'd tend to believe Andreis, especially considering he actually showed some data. And I just saw that he replied to "Golden Reviewer" citing a post which has since been deleted that apparently showed their "laughable" method.
Edit: I couldn't find a cache of the chinese post, so ?♂️
Last edited:
I wonder how accurate you can get by measuring battery life under load vs idle? It would solve the issue of trying to measure the waveform accurately though it only tell you total joules used and thus average power, you couldn’t get peak wattage.
That might work. You could do a calibration run below 6W (or whatever the cutoff is when it starts drawing from the battery) off usb, and then do subsequent runs on battery. Could also record how much energy it takes to recharge, though recharging generates a fair amount of heat. It’d be interesting to see how much error there is between repeated measurements (given all tests in airplane mode, black screen, etc.).
So we finally know the date...all the speculation will come to an end Monday night and we will see the final products
It just means the speculation will start on the high end iMac and Mac Pro, I expect. 
We are going to start speculating about the iMac/Mac Pro versions instead.
The site is called MacRumors after all.
It depends on how much of the Jade Die rumors are true, and how quickly the variants area ready. I'd expect that the high end iMac will cap out one step higher than the 16" MBP, and potentially have overlap with the base model Mac Pro, to be honest.
Yeah, the speculation around how the new matrix will break down won't die down until Apple shows us what the new normal looks like I think.
- There is no Face ID, with the notch to house a 1080p webcam, an ambient light sensor, and an indicator light.
- There will be a mini-LED display.
- The MacBook Pro is "very thick, thick and heavy."
- The maximum configuration of "32+4T" will be its biggest selling point.
- Apple will add two large fans to the new chip.
- "Don't expect too much on narrow borders. It is indeed narrow, but it is not much narrow."
- Touch Bar is gone.
- MacBook Pro models will feature MagSafe, HDMI Port, and SD Card slot.
- No "MacBook Pro" logo on the bottom bezel.
- Bezel width remains at the current size, with the bezels at the three sides basically the same width with the bottom bezel thicker.
- The MacBook Pro "has various curves" to give people an "intuitive feeling that it is a large rectangle."
I’m really eager to read what AnandTech has to say about this upcoming silicon.
But I’m afraid that’ll take time. At least a month. It’s gonna be a long wait!
But I’m afraid that’ll take time. At least a month. It’s gonna be a long wait!
No, he's repeating a list from a Macrumors article. No one's mentioned full-size function keys, though
i still think that "last minute leak" could be wrong..i mean a very thick and heavier MBP?
What can you do in the 16" to make him even heavier since the display size is the same...battery capacity its already at its legal right...i bet the M1x with 32 gpu cores should not be heavier than the intel cpu+dGpu...what bigger vents and bigger heat pipe?
@leman what do you think, can this be real?
What can you do in the 16" to make him even heavier since the display size is the same...battery capacity its already at its legal right...i bet the M1x with 32 gpu cores should not be heavier than the intel cpu+dGpu...what bigger vents and bigger heat pipe?
@leman what do you think, can this be real?
Last edited:
It seems very unlikely. Besides the battery already being at the maximum, Apple Silicon should be more power efficient than a CPU + dGPU, so the cooling requirements are probably going down, not up.
exactly , so this rumour should be false...the 16" should go or stay as thick as it is now, and it should go lighter and not heavier