Yup. It would be silly for intel to hide their roadmap and lose Apple as a client.
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.
CES 2021: Intel Highlights Next-Generation 'Alder Lake' Chips
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hi everyone,
not gonna protect Intel for „slouching“ around vs the competition, but could please EVERYONE here going like : „duh Intel is so behind - they are still on 14nm++++++ - they must be the dum.... company on the planet“ please back off.
7 vs 10 vs 14 nm has NOTHING to do wit Transistor size (anymore). It is simply just a remnant of earlier times and the „nm“ term is only used to name generational jumps/improvements. Whether it is a declining number (14-10-7-5-3....) or gen 1,2,3,4,5, or just simply adding (those friggin ) „++++“ -it simply doesn‘t matter anymore.
For clarification: Der 8auer actually took Intel and AMD under „a“ microscope - and guess what: Size and evolution DOES not really differ - so please bash Intel otherwise/correctly.
Video part 1:
Video part 2:
Video part 3:
Enjoy learning about „14“ vs „7“ nm
not gonna protect Intel for „slouching“ around vs the competition, but could please EVERYONE here going like : „duh Intel is so behind - they are still on 14nm++++++ - they must be the dum.... company on the planet“ please back off.
7 vs 10 vs 14 nm has NOTHING to do wit Transistor size (anymore). It is simply just a remnant of earlier times and the „nm“ term is only used to name generational jumps/improvements. Whether it is a declining number (14-10-7-5-3....) or gen 1,2,3,4,5, or just simply adding (those friggin ) „++++“ -it simply doesn‘t matter anymore.
For clarification: Der 8auer actually took Intel and AMD under „a“ microscope - and guess what: Size and evolution DOES not really differ - so please bash Intel otherwise/correctly.
Video part 1:
Enjoy learning about „14“ vs „7“ nm
Having technology isn’t the same as being able to ship it at scale.
They also made some poor decisions around 2015 that they’re finally recovering from. But yes, competition is good.
still 10 nm... they need to find something else to explain why they think this will be more efficient than the competition.
Last edited:
Why should they do what you want? If people want to rant, can they not rant?
I'm not saying that you're incorrect, but it's not up to you to police what opinions can be expressed and which can't.
People have the right to be wrong, including me, including you.
Sorry, not to pick on your posts but this is literally legacy thinking. There is no consumer software that my kids use on x86 k-12, unless you include xbox, and Apple will eat most of that market in 2 years.
The other thing to note is that Apple is a bundled good - across phones, tablets and pcs. They can in some way undercut the "chip" part of the machine, through efficiencies in other parts of the product (think Apple vs. surface). And the ipad pro is an INSANE device. People still don't realize how important that product is to computing and work generally.
This is going to be like Apple's A-series chips vs snapdragon processors all over again, isn't it?
There might be room for Intel Macs in the near future considering how bad all the music software (except Logic) support the M1 currently.
I think in the end, majority of the laptops out there on the market are the low end laptops $600 and under. Apple is not touching that market at all with the cheapest Macbook Air being $999. So when a person wants a laptop for $500, it will be automatically a Windows laptop. Even iPads are not competitive in this segment. And the 11" iPad Pro, although I'm sure it's a great device, is $800 for 128GB base without a keyboard. Meanwhile, for $600, one can already get a 15" i5 Windows laptop with 512GB SSD.
Imo Apple will not eat this segment unless they are willing to push the Macbook further down into the sub $800 price range, and I don't think that's gonna happen.
The thing that really bothered me with Intel is that heat. My MacBook would reach insane heat levels (90C/194F) for simpler tasks and the fans will go crazy. I thought to myself, it must just be the nature of the beast thats how CPUs work. I am not sure if its Apple choice of thinner and narrow design.
But Apple has proved that this does not have to be the case, they made a faster CPU that is much cooler. People are talking about the fans never turning on!
Intel is the Adobe Flash of CPUs.
But Apple has proved that this does not have to be the case, they made a faster CPU that is much cooler. People are talking about the fans never turning on!
Intel is the Adobe Flash of CPUs.
To be fair, Intel's 10nm has a higher transistor density than TSMC's 7nm.
"nm" is just a marketing term these days and doesn't mean much anymore. The marketing is clearly working tho considering so many people don't know this.
Alder Lake and whatever Intel comes up with is just going to be crap compared to Apple Silicon. My M1 Mac simply blows any intel chip away.
While future M based Macs will undoubtedly support more RAM than the current M1 machines; Apple is never going to redesign their M architecture to fit in with "typical" Desktop/Workstations/Servers... That's just legacy; and Apple don't do legacy.
I think I'm more amazed that the M1 pretty much functions "as is" on just battery.
Agreed, but I think it was a necessary evil. Wouldn't be good if the MacBook Air was destroying the MacBook Pro (13") in performance. So, yes, this is a problem, but I suspect a temporary one.
It's weird seeing the negativity in some posts regarding the M1. The M1 is the FIRST "desktop-class" chip from Apple (or anyone, for that matter) on the ARM side.
Suggesting that we'll be "longing for Intel" is naive at best. I was longing for Intel to make a CPU worthy of beating my i7-4960HQ (2013 MBP) for about 7 years. The M1 finally does this, and does so with better battery life, no fan noise, and is so much faster in CPU and GPU performance, even when unplugged.
Can it push to two external monitors? Nope. Have I ever connected ANY of my MacBooks or PowerBook before it to externals? Nope. So, this M1 limitation doesn't affect me personally, but I can understand the concern. Still, this is a temporary issue. Anyone who can't see that is fooling themselves. Don't get an M1 (laptop) if you need two external displays. Wait for the M1x or M2 or whatever its name will be.
As for running Windows natively being a problem, nope. The majority of people I know who buy Macs don't know or care about Boot Camp or VMs or WINE or any of that crap. Sorry. If you bought Mac for Windows, you're a minority.
I believe we'll see lots of competition between Apple's Mx chips and AMD's offerings, but I won't hold my breath for Intel to reclaim the crown anytime soon. They sat on their asses for so long.
Suggesting that we'll be "longing for Intel" is naive at best. I was longing for Intel to make a CPU worthy of beating my i7-4960HQ (2013 MBP) for about 7 years. The M1 finally does this, and does so with better battery life, no fan noise, and is so much faster in CPU and GPU performance, even when unplugged.
Can it push to two external monitors? Nope. Have I ever connected ANY of my MacBooks or PowerBook before it to externals? Nope. So, this M1 limitation doesn't affect me personally, but I can understand the concern. Still, this is a temporary issue. Anyone who can't see that is fooling themselves. Don't get an M1 (laptop) if you need two external displays. Wait for the M1x or M2 or whatever its name will be.
As for running Windows natively being a problem, nope. The majority of people I know who buy Macs don't know or care about Boot Camp or VMs or WINE or any of that crap. Sorry. If you bought Mac for Windows, you're a minority.
I believe we'll see lots of competition between Apple's Mx chips and AMD's offerings, but I won't hold my breath for Intel to reclaim the crown anytime soon. They sat on their asses for so long.
