> touting how special the software optimizations are for making this TSMC node's product so fast and efficient.
> My money is it's 90% TSMC that made Apple Silicon so much better than the Intel trash Apple was stuck with,
This comes across as quite bizarre, as though you believe Apple Silicon Macs are a combination of TSMC chips and Apple software, rather than Apple chips (manufactured by TSMC) with Apple software. Is it really that hard for you to believe that Apple could have come up with chip designs that are genuinely good even when fab process differences are not a factor?
How will running Linux instead of macOS shed any new light on how much credit for the hardware quality should go to TSMC rather than to Apple?
> This comes across as quite bizarre, as though you believe Apple Silicon Macs are a combination of TSMC chips and Apple software, rather than Apple chips (manufactured by TSMC) with Apple software.
No, it's deliberately bizarre. I'm speaking to specifically all the ridiculous nonsense I've read on HN from Apple fanbois trying to convince the world that these are so good because of magical synergies of Apple software with Apple Silicon.
Apple seems to have designed a good chip, TSMC manufactured it. I don't deny either of those things. The same can be said of AMD.
> My money is it's 90% TSMC that made Apple Silicon so much better than the Intel trash Apple was stuck with,
This comes across as quite bizarre, as though you believe Apple Silicon Macs are a combination of TSMC chips and Apple software, rather than Apple chips (manufactured by TSMC) with Apple software. Is it really that hard for you to believe that Apple could have come up with chip designs that are genuinely good even when fab process differences are not a factor?
How will running Linux instead of macOS shed any new light on how much credit for the hardware quality should go to TSMC rather than to Apple?