Apple procures TSMC's entire supply of 3nm chips, insiders say

[yRaz]

Which is still not what TSMC is talking about. Regarding Bullwinkle M's query, the performance gains stated are purely from clock speed increases. Besides, using a smaller process node has no direct bearing on a processor's instruction per clock rate -- take AMD's Vega 10 and Vega 20 GPUs, as an example. The former was manufactured on GlobalFoundries 14nm node, whereas the latter used TSMC's N7, yet they have exactly the same IPC per Shader Engine/Compute Unit.

I did some digging and found that the measure I was looking for was instructions per second(IPS) that is a measure of the instructions the entire chip was capable of instead of Instructions per clock. That information was not easy for me to find so it might be useful to bring awareness to it at some point. It's also worth notng the limitations of using IPS because it is heavily influenced by clock speed. So when I wrote that I was referring to a chip with 15% more transistors being theoretically capable of 15% more IPS at the same clock speed

 

[Tams80]

Your comment is completely unrelated to the topic at hand

Maybe this will explain it better >

Pick the least inaccurate statement

(A) Now with a 15% higher speed @ the exact same speed
(B) Now with a 15% better efficiency level @ the same level of efficiency
(C) Now with a 15% lower operating temperature @ the exact same temperature
(D) None of the above

Hint:
If you still can't figure it out, the correct answer is (D)

Regardless of what you heard, words "STILL" have standard meanings

All your options there are contradictory and make zero sense.

I assumed better if you, and that your ambiguous sentence meant you didn't understand why percentage increases in speed and efficiency are not the same. My comment was a response to that.

But no; you really did mean it in a nonsensical way.

'According to TSMC, its 3nm tech can offer up to a 15 percent speed improvement and up to 30 percent power reduction at the same speed compared to its N5 technology.'

TSMC made no mention of the efficiency at the improved speeds, only at the same speed as N5.

Shawn did mess it up a bit though, as the original text is:

'up to 15% speed improvement at the same power and up to 30% power reduction at the same speed as compared with N5 technology.'

Either way, you can either get 15% more speed, 30% power reduction, or anything in-between, but not both say the same time.

Simple, really.

 

[rsmith222]

What is here to not understand? Blocking competition from technology is the best Apple innovation...

Almost as good as bottlenecking innovation behind corporate walls.