TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
Suspended
Don't forget about the non-stop loud fan. Just passing the heat across.
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.
Benchmarks Confirm Intel's Latest Core i9 Chip Outperforms Apple's M1 Max With Several Caveats
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You do know Apple gets priority on 3nm right?
Intel building new US fabs will take 5-7yrs minimum so they'll still be behind on efficiencies.
He's talking about the CPU integrated graphics performance not the dedicated GPUs.
Apple is not factoring the price of the CPU into their products.
A4 to A15 devices still at competitve pricing; economies of scale.
M1 in MBA and MBP 13" in 2021 and with iPad Pro 2021 11'& 12.9"; $100 increase due to higher storage base and LED on 12.9" so again economies of scale.
I do agree the length of getting new chips is really what's hurting Apple.
Moreover on MBP
- Better sounding speakers (better at anything overall).
- Better microphones,
- better screen resolution and quality of what's being presented on the screen, not to mention brighter,
- better design - arguably for some, some just hate on Apple right from the logo/brand.
- better balanced hardware - weight, performance from small to heavy load tasks (software: workflow, its REAL meaning), along with better software meant to work optimally on the hardware.
. plus much more.
Last edited:
I will take M1 anyday. Less power consumption = less heat = less fan noise = more stable performance curve = lower energy bill = thinner chassis = happier customer. Additionally, comparing a 40 watts chip vs 100 watts chip is like comparing ultrabook performance vs desktop performance or racing my bike against a motorcycle. Its ridiculous. Intel are not stupid. They are absolutely terrified by the M1 performance so they will do any marketing trick to make their chip looks somehow better. Apple is years ahead of Intel, and we are just about to see M2 in the following months.
Your use case is the only one that matters yes. i see now that your point is the be all and end all.
Jeez.
The machine has the OPTION to run portably from a battery. See that word in bold type???
You have the OPTION to do X on your X core whatever. You might not always be in that predicament.
Man. Some people…….
I'm not a PC fanboy, I am a Mac user.
But I can also acknowledge when Intel release something good.
Intel started working with TSMC as well, and will get access to same 5nm 3nm nodes that Apple does in near future. (year or two). The performance gap is likely to increase then, while efficiency gap will decrease.
It is not clear whether m1 chips are more efficient than Intel/Amd because of the new architecture, or it is just a mere consequence of using smaller nodes.
It is not clear whether m1 chips are more efficient than Intel/Amd because of the new architecture, or it is just a mere consequence of using smaller nodes.
Last edited:
Raider GE 76 performance curve is pretty stable, according to benchmarks.
GE is not a desktop, it is a gaming laptop.
M2 will compete against 13 gen (and zen4). Not sure it will be the winner.
Apple is not "years ahead of Intel". TSMC is. Now Intel works with them too...
Intel chips have other advantages besides performance and these should not be neglected.
PS: I agree that as laptop, MBPs are still potentially better (once the software issues on macs get sorted out).
Last edited:
Why not just compare against phones then? I am pretty sure phones beat everyone.
Heat is not a thing? Why does Gamers Nexus produce video after video about case efficiency, fan effectiveness, noise testing, and cooling? Heat and noise are ALWAYS the problem on desktop. We appreciate the extra heat in the winter, wear headphones to cover up the fans, and spend double on noctua fans, and pretend heat is not an issue? Cmon now. We live with it, of course it’s an issue.
What’s the point of having this CPU in a laptop if you also need to take around a generator?
There simply is no comparison the thermal envelope of M1 Max is quite superior, while i9 would likely be in 95-140 Watts range.
So no news here then.
It's just going to be tit for tat.
In some ways that's good for the consumer because it constantly pushes the performance envelope up.
But if you're one of those people who always has to have the fastest and best, it's a sure fire way of keeping your wallet always empty.
It's just going to be tit for tat.
In some ways that's good for the consumer because it constantly pushes the performance envelope up.
But if you're one of those people who always has to have the fastest and best, it's a sure fire way of keeping your wallet always empty.
Last edited:
Apple hasnt even made a M1 for the pro desktop line yet these headline grabbing title is just dirty Intel Marketing tactic which they used on AMD for Years. Trying the same on Apple while hiding the fact on laptop weight and battery.
Professionally, this is not an issue. It's a portable that travels between home (where it has power), work (where it has power, screens etc) and is usable in meetings/on the train etc.
If performance is significantly lower when not connected, that's a tradeoff that wouldn't be an issue for man users either.
I definitely prefer a Mac, while for others - like the target demographic of this laptop - a Mac is not an option at all: MacOS is not exactly the gamer OS of choice, due to lack of games.
It's not really dirty as the performance of their top end chips isn't a lie.
I think it’s clear where Apple is going with their chips. Sustained performance without needing to be plugged into an external power source. In a portable form factor with a fan that’s dead silent.
Intel can try to show that their chips are somehow better than Apple’s under very niche conditions, but at the end of the day, both are really marketing to very different crowds.
Intel can try to show that their chips are somehow better than Apple’s under very niche conditions, but at the end of the day, both are really marketing to very different crowds.
If you need a laptop that will last on battery life then hands down it's the Apple silicon range of macbooks BUT if your someone who requires speed over anything else than it's Intel.
When it comes to Intel v Apple AS people need to understand that chosing between the two depends interialy on what the purpose the laptop is going to be used for. In some walks of life there are instances where getting the work done quicker can mean the difference of winning a work contract or losing one and the 4% speed difference can be that difference between winning or losing a contract.
Time is money and for some in the world that is extremely important thus they will opt for an Intel machine rather than a Apple AS one but if you are someone who is always on the go and does not have the oppertunity to charge their laptop each time then the Apple AS machines are the way to go.
When it comes to Intel v Apple AS people need to understand that chosing between the two depends interialy on what the purpose the laptop is going to be used for. In some walks of life there are instances where getting the work done quicker can mean the difference of winning a work contract or losing one and the 4% speed difference can be that difference between winning or losing a contract.
Time is money and for some in the world that is extremely important thus they will opt for an Intel machine rather than a Apple AS one but if you are someone who is always on the go and does not have the oppertunity to charge their laptop each time then the Apple AS machines are the way to go.
It is both. In the end, the iPhone chip (A14) has the best battery life out of all other 5nm ARM chips you find in Android smartphones. So the iPhone engineers deserve all the credits of what we are seeing with the M1 and M1 Max.
AMD was already giving the M1 a run for it's money as the Razor 14" Blade with the RTX 3060 is in the end a more powerful machine than a similar spec'ed M1 MBP for the same price.
However AMD was doing this on the older 7nm node as Apple bought all 5nm capacity at the time. So I am curious what AMD will do when they come with their new CPU's and also switch to TSMC 5nm / 3nm (when Apple stops being greedy)
However, Apple will always be leading in the battery life department because they simply leverage from the iPhone's chip battery efficiency. Apple has obviously spend much more money than any other company in their iPhone chip. The iPhone is Apple their money maker, so you can imagine that Apple, a company who has more money than most countries, poured a lot of money in the development of their iPhone chip (which is what the M1 and M1 Max basically are also)
Last edited:
The new M2 chip will be much faster than Intel.
MacBook Pro 16-inch with a „Duo M2 MAX“ chip will be more than double as fast than Intel and need only 50% watt compared to Intel. This could be even interesting for chess…
But with 17-inch or 18-inch, that‘s much better than this little MacBook Pro with only 16-inch. 1-inch = 2.50 cm!!
Apple should start to sell 18-inch too and also at least two SSDs (2x 8 TB).
MacBook Pro 16-inch with a „Duo M2 MAX“ chip will be more than double as fast than Intel and need only 50% watt compared to Intel. This could be even interesting for chess…
But with 17-inch or 18-inch, that‘s much better than this little MacBook Pro with only 16-inch. 1-inch = 2.50 cm!!
Apple should start to sell 18-inch too and also at least two SSDs (2x 8 TB).
I’d be an Intel fan day one if they did that!