Comment If you like toasters (Score 2) 35
That isn't being entirely genuine.
Er...not exactly. Keep reading their analysis in the first article you referenced. Seems to me the fuller picture is that the 12400 on the whole meets or beats the Ryzen offerings, except for one of the benchmarks. So it seems the Intel wins much more than the Ryzen, even on non-gaming benchmarks. But, the thing that I don't see anyone pointing out here, is power consumption to get there. Intel TDP != AMD TDP. On average AMD TDP is really a max power measure, and Intel's is less so. In fact, Intel has apparently stopped measuring power by TDP and is instead going on base and turbo power measures. Alder Lake is, AFAICT, has a very powerful AND VERY powerful hungry core. To me, the jump in power to acheive the performance gain puts this in perspective. If all-out performance, power-consumption-be-damned, Alder Lake is really impressive. But pretty not-impressive when you measure watts to get there, probably. AMD will win that, in this case despite it being an old Zen2 architecture. So in this case, Is it really fair to compare the 65W TDP AMD part to the base 65W, turbo 117W Intel part? Well, I guess it depends on your measure and your interests. But this performance and efficiency core architecture seems to really complicate the idea that I can compare an x core AMD part to an x core Intel part and that be a fair and meaningful comparison. At the price point, energy aside, the 12400 is pretty compelling. If I cared about gaming. But I personally care about watts. A lot. Which is why my next machine is an M1 Max.
