I thought that product was burned since a certain weather briefing?
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
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.
Apple Now Selling More M1 Macs Than Intel-Based Models, Says Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
it already exists (minus u1 chip). macbook can be tracked via bluetooth even if you’re miles away.
..and yet it has Intel making a lot of noise about it.
That alone is an endorsement of just how good it is by just how threatened Intel feels.
If it was a joke Intel would be ignoring it.
I have comparable 4K render times to my 2019 i7 MacBook Pro, so, I dunno. Not really light usage there. No matter how you cut it, Premiere Pro is a resource-intensive piece of software.
Edit: And let me add that Adobe hasn't even released the version of Premiere Pro which is optimized for M1 yet. I am doing all of this through Rosetta 2.
That's not surprising, anyone who really wanted an Intel mac got them on the last refresh before M1 macs started launching. Anyone who hasn't bought a new machine at this point is either buying M1 or waiting to see how their preferred model shapes up.
With all early accounts of M1 being really solid, it would be weird to buy an Intel mac now unless you REALLY need bootcamp. Which, as one of the five gamers in the world that is purely a mac owner, is absolutely my use-case.
With all early accounts of M1 being really solid, it would be weird to buy an Intel mac now unless you REALLY need bootcamp. Which, as one of the five gamers in the world that is purely a mac owner, is absolutely my use-case.
As you likely already know, the M1 has 4 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores, which collectively are about as fast a single one of the efficiency cores. So, the Threadripper has over 12 times as many effective cores, yet is only 10 times faster in multicore performance, because M1 performance cores are faster than Threadripper cores.
They‘re plenty useful. I have Activity Monitor up on my M1 Mini, and my typical workload runs the efficiency cores at about 25% each with the performance cores off. Only games or compiling big apps even turn on the performance cores.
Apple will likely clock the Firestorm cores higher than it's current 3.2 GHz of the M1 for the next batch of Macs. So the next batch of Macs will likely rewrite the benchmark landscape again. I remember reading about a tweet stating that the Cinebench R23 benchmark not saturating the compute capability of the M1 compared to other CPU benchmark. So using Cinebench may not be a good comparison between x86 and M1.
I'll not be surprised to find that the 2021 M1 iMacs may already be clocked higher compared to the M1 MBA, MBP and Mini, seeing that it now has two fans. We'll just have to wait for the benchmarks to get published.
I'm not too surprised, aside from the entry level point, most people are probably under the assumption that intel powered macs will have support dropped before these m1's do, why buy the older tech? I did buy a 2020 i3 mac mini last year in August as it was on sale and after the ram upgrade this system screams for my needs. If i thought 16gb would match this, Id get a 16gb mac mini but i have no need for another one.
Regardless of current sales, the vast majority of Mac users are on Intel.
Developers know this, Apple knows this. If you’ve dropped 2k on a Mac in the past few years you’re not going to do so again for a while now.
Also boot camp still impresses me.
Developers know this, Apple knows this. If you’ve dropped 2k on a Mac in the past few years you’re not going to do so again for a while now.
Also boot camp still impresses me.
Last edited:
I just see a machine rendering 10 times as fast as your M1 machine. That's all that counts to me.
It’s kind of hard for people buying a new computer to not get an M1 when that’s all that was released last year... they want latest and greatest.
I got an Intel 2018 Mac mini earlier this year because I can’t make the full switch to M1 with its current limitations, primarily the displays and I use 32GB of RAM. It’s mostly because of work but also private applications and scripts I run. It would have been nice to have at least one more Intel refresh, but it doesn’t look like that’s happening. I guess Apple meant they’ll keep selling the intels alongside the M1s for a couple of years, but not upgrade them.
I got an Intel 2018 Mac mini earlier this year because I can’t make the full switch to M1 with its current limitations, primarily the displays and I use 32GB of RAM. It’s mostly because of work but also private applications and scripts I run. It would have been nice to have at least one more Intel refresh, but it doesn’t look like that’s happening. I guess Apple meant they’ll keep selling the intels alongside the M1s for a couple of years, but not upgrade them.
Depends on if you count from the first release, or the WWDC announcement. I took it to mean 2 years from WWDC 2020, so the last (Mac Pro?) models get rolled out at WWDC next year. I’d say we’re solidly on track for that if the larger iMac and rest of the MacBook Pro’s debut later in the year.
When airdrop was first announced with iOS 7, the only devices that supported it were the iPhone 5 and 5s.
Today, it's standard issue on all iOS and Mac devices.
Apple always plays the long game. Eventually, all Macs will be M1. There is no point in fighting the inevitable.
They are currently on Intel, but they will transition to AS sooner or later. When one wants to upgrade his/her Intel Mac 5 years later, there will only be AS Macs. That’s why it’s called a transition. Apple already set it up, and developers will quickly follow. That doesn’t mean your current Intel Macs will stop working on the dot, but its destiny is already fixed.