quiet_thinker

I've been reading into this for the past 2h and it's the same story for most docking stations:
Explaining 4K 60Hz Video Through USB-C Hub | Big Mess o' Wires (bigmessowires.com)

You can even see this in this datasheet:
i-tec USB-C Dual Display Docking Station with Power Delivery 100 W
 
Unfortunatelly it looks like there is a Thunderbolt "standard" but there are also 100 different implementations and it makes this whole thing a huge mess.

According to the specs on the site it has only 15W charging. You sure you have the same dock?

EDIT: NVM - it supports 75W, however it only supports 4k 60Hz under DP 1.4, and my monitor only supports DP 1.2. 😞 

the division 2

FINAL UPDATE: It turned out to be a hardware issue and I had to replace the laptop. In the new one the problem does not occur.

These scenarios would be a different class entirely. They would have a problem and buy the hardware which best suits the solution and probably write their own custom software too.
 
We're talking weather simulation, space simulation, designing new medicines.
 
For average Joe Mac user, AFAIK at least, there's no situation where having an Intel would allow a workload that an AMD wouldn't.

Mac Pro users that use intel hedt it would make no difference if the CPU was a Threadripper afaik. Assuming Apple opened up to the usual MacOS stuff. Performance would be different.
 
Im hoping LTT compares their hackintoshes with the 28 core intel and 32 core AMD when they review the new mac. Since they would have all three on hand. 
 
 

It would have to be some very old or non-standard CPU (like a xeon phi) that requires a special operating system.
The operating system is the one that would not support standard instructions.
Which is why you can't run regular programs on something like a xeon phi.

In the home market, no. Anybody targeting an application to the masses will target as many instruction sets as possible to make the app as compatible as possible.
 
In business, very much yes. There are scientific applications which rely on AVX512 and as such will only work on high end Intel CPUs but those are incredibly niche. You're talking universities and large scale scientific organisations, the type of places that will probably have super computers in the basement. Insane simulation, protein folding, the kind of stuff scientists do but us at home will never do. In fact most of this kind of stuff would probably be custom written code specifically for the purpose.

This is about the only possible scenario I can think of also, if some software was hard coded to require a feature only present in Intel CPUs. If this exists, it'll probably be very niche. General software may make use of multiple codepaths for different architectures to get the best out of each of them, regardless of the feature set available.
 
There is also some non-zero risk that even with the same instruction support, there may be implementation differences sufficient to cause it to work on one and not the other. This shouldn't happen, but nothing is perfect. Again, this could be taken care off by either the code or compiler having knowledge of this and doing what is necessary to make it work as expected.

The only difference will be instruction set extensions like SSE, AVX etc (except for a few arbitrary exceptions Intel enforces for no real reason apart from greed such as ECC RAM support).
 
Both CPUs are running an identical base instruction set (X86-64) and each CPUs will ultimately do the exact same work as the other. The difference is efficiency and by extension time.

no consumer/prosumer workload that i am aware of. there are apperantly AI workloads where intel is the only x86 provider, but at that point you should be using a GPU anyways. and im pretty sure you can use other instructions for the same task.
with the exception of a couple of instructions, there really isnt a something you can do on intel you cant on AMD. 
 
their macro and microarchitecture is different, but they do the same stuff. 
hackintoshes have gotten around that, tho with some annoying limitations, but apperantly very easy installation process. 
 
tl;dr: there really isnt something one CPU can do while the other one cant. the speed at which they do it might differ, but that is a different story. 

Must ? No. Where Intel will have some upper ground ? Yes, anything that relies on ST performance mostly, like gaming, Adobe CC software (all of it, even Premiere), CAD, 3D modeling, possibly some software that relies on RAM performance heavily since Zen 2 are still a bit slow on this side. But all this might change with the next generations.

No, just stuff that performs worse on AMD.
Unless you make some program yourself that requires the use of quicksync, in which case you wouldn't be able to use an AMD CPU.
But all programs out there that use quicksync can work without it.