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.
Five Years of Apple Silicon: M1 to M5 Performance Comparison
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
my mid-2010 MBP continues to function (yes I switched to opera with os10.13) it opens web pages, and I can write software (gcc compiler suite). I'll upgrade when/if I decide to do so. as for os software bloat - as long as hardware is
relatively cheaper than producing tight code bloatware will continue ( I think the trend started in the 80's when memory address limits increased sharply)
relatively cheaper than producing tight code bloatware will continue ( I think the trend started in the 80's when memory address limits increased sharply)
no, different metrics often give different results - the key is your application needs ( personally I've always been concerned with FLOPS comparison which I suspect in the 2.1 times faster metric)
Yeah the M1 MBA was an incredible little machine, still using that and an M1 iMac, though I do have an M2 pro mini for more demanding tasks
Regarding OLED, I hope they always keep an option for LCD for those of us that like it better. I don’t need pure blacks on a laptop, and I’d rather have a screen that can’t burn in, since I don’t like to hide the menu bar or dock
This made me curious for some real world results. In this case compiling code since that's what I tend to do. Here's a result I found doing a search:
| Chip | Test/Workload | Time | Comparison Notes | Source |
| M4 Pro | Firefox codebase build (Xcode 16) | 10m 53s | 11% faster than M3 Pro, 33% faster than M1 Pro | |
| M3 Pro | Firefox codebase build (Xcode 16) | 12m 16s | 7% faster than M2 Pro, 24% faster than M1 Pro | |
| M2 Pro | Firefox codebase build (Xcode 16) | 13m 10s | 19% faster than M1 Pro | |
| M1 Pro | Firefox codebase build (Xcode 16) | 16m 16s | Baseline for Pro models | |
| M4 (Base) | Xcode Benchmark build | 141s | 45% faster than M1 base | |
| M1 (Base) | Xcode Benchmark build | 258s | Baseline for base models |
I suspect the differences between chips is much greater when doing graphics intensive things like video editing but clearly just incremental for compiling code.
Like many others, the basic M1 has been more than sufficient for me. I have the 16/512 config, which handles the RAW photo editing like a champ. An upgrade will come probably when this thing stops working. Considering how long my other Macs have lasted, that is probably still years away.
The only company I can think of is Nvidia in that time frame for a performance jump similar to Apple in relation to GPU, BUT certainly not efficiency .
Intel, AMD and Qaulcomm haven’t come close to what Apple has done in that same time frame. Both of you are right .
I think the poster for that claim about Intel, AMD, Nvidia and Qualcomm is joking, or they are from another dimension 🤣🤪
I needed better battery life and less heat. I think I was more impressed picking up an M1 MBP over the highest spec Intel MBP than I was going from the highest level PowerBook to a then highest level Intel MBP
Hard to think about Appel without Appel Silicon. It's become their crown jewel. It's Apple's gift to computing. There is No way I would have ever thud thought of even buying a Mac without it. I felt like I had a superpower when I realized my iPad Pro with those AX chips blew away my desktop windows machine and a cr@py Windows laptop.
I even wonder if Apple would even be relevant today without Apple Silicon. I kinda doubt it.
I even wonder if Apple would even be relevant today without Apple Silicon. I kinda doubt it.
Last edited:
Pretty sure you mean 2x CPU/GPU not 6x. 6x would be massive news.
Today marks the fifth anniversary of the Apple silicon chip that replaced Intel chips in Apple's Mac lineup. The first Apple silicon chip, the M1, was unveiled on November 10, 2020. The M1 debuted in the MacBook Air, Mac mini, and 13-inch MacBook Pro.
The M1 chip was impressive when it launched, featuring the "world's fastest CPU core" and industry-leading performance per watt, and it's only improved since then. We've had five total generations of Apple silicon chips, with the M5 unveiled in the 14-inch MacBook Pro just last month.
Here's how the M5 measures up to the M1, per Apple's M5 specs:
Geekbench comparison scores:
- 6x faster CPU/GPU performance
- 6x faster AI performance
- 7.7x faster AI video processing
- 6.8x faster 3D rendering
- 2.6x faster gaming performance
- 2.1x faster code compiling
Both CPU and GPU performance have increased significantly over the past five years, and Apple has boosted AI and gaming performance too with add-ons like hardware-accelerated ray tracing and an ever-improving Neural Engine.
- M1 single-core - 2,320
- M5 single-core - 4,263
- M1 multi-core - 8,175
- M5 multi-core - 17,862
- M1 Metal - 33,041
- M5 Metal - 75,637
M1 Chip M5 Chip Made with TSMC's 5nm process (N5) Made TSMC's third-generation 3nm process (N3P) Based on A14 Bionic Pro chip from iPhone 12 Based on A19 Pro chip from iPhone 17 Pro 8-core CPU, 8-core GPU 10-core CPU, 10-core GPU 3.2 GHz CPU clock speed 4.61 GHz CPU clock speed No integrated Neural Accelerators Integrated Neural Accelerator in every GPU core No ray tracing engine Third-generation ray tracing engine No dynamic caching Second-generation dynamic caching Support for up to 16GB unified memory Support for up to 32GB unified memory 68.25 GB/s unified memory bandwidth 153 GB/s unified memory bandwidth
Apple sold Apple silicon Macs alongside Intel Macs for three years, but phased out the final Intel Mac in June 2023 when the 2019 Mac Pro was discontinued. Now all of Apple's devices have Apple chips, and we're even hitting the end of the road for Intel Mac software support. Intel Macs won't get software updates after macOS Tahoe.
Over the next five years, Apple silicon chip technology will continue to evolve. Apple supplier TSMC is already working on 2nm chips that could make an appearance as soon as 2026, offering a 10 to 15 percent speed improvement and a 25 to 30 percent power reduction. 1.4nm chips could follow as soon as 2028 for even more power and efficiency.
Article Link: Five Years of Apple Silicon: M1 to M5 Performance Comparison
I loved the Intel Macs because of the ability to run native intel Windows and Linux which allows me run third party programs not available on the Mac. Apple ditching Intel along with locking down the OS with each release plus the 26 version making lots of text illegible is making me think my next machine will be from a Windows hardware provider.
Yes…I thought the same.
M1 16” MacBook Pro = BEST Laptop I have ever had (Period).
I will upgrade Apple, so don’t make the OS make me….WE know how it all works….
YOU will get my money, just not now. Some have waited a long long time for the M1….patiently.
Be patient with us and allow us to enjoy it a little while longer. 😉
When my wife’s Dell fan kicks on under light use, I laugh. It’s not loud, it’s just on my M1Pro 16”, the fan has turned one audibly once in 4 years, and that was under a very heavy load and I had accidentally left a sheet of paper covering the entire keyboard.
Shift to Apple Silicon has been huge. Apple is able to launch products at regular intervals due to the shift. Improvements from the 1st generation to the latest have been very good. Have M1,M2 and M4 chips in my Macs and iPad Pro. Will be very interesting to see how it improves in the future.
OS26 is SOOOO bad as an interface it is frightening. The fact they are now helping you turn some of it off is a black eye for them.
Whether it is on AppleTV or an iPad or a Mac, the GUI is just so BAD it’s ridiculous. Even on the TV, which barely has an interface, they made the control center CLEAR which made it impossible to use.
On the phone the email app has a ton of bugs that make it impossible to type anything in some situations, and in websites the dialogue boxes for form inputs and passwords often hide their buttons and entirely hide the text entry field they apply to! This is on a Max. Can’t imagine how bad a smaller screen is.
Not in a laptop chip. AMD is close though. Intel has very power efficient chips that are dog slow (the N100) and screaming fast chips at the power levels you won't find in a laptop.
I looked around and find that the M4 is 22 watts TDP and the Ryzen 8840HS is 28. Benchmark wise by Passmark benchmarks the 10 core M4 is 22,840 and the Ryzen is 25,129. So AMD at least is very close.
By the way Wally World has a Lenovo laptop using that Ryzen with 16/512 for $569. Apple needs to up their game. Competition is good.
Last edited:
I kind of doubt that. It's all about the memory and/or the SSD capacity, especially when you consider VST usage.
If that battery is getting hot, you might want to consider having it replaced. Hot battery that's 13 years old is asking for a house fire.My 2012 MBP is doing fine as wellOf course gets hot sometimes and battery is dead but for my needs...
I agree, especially with the use of performance and efficiency cores under varying workloads. Intel missed the boat on that one.
If we can rename the Gulf of America, we can rename anything. Of course, "Washington Commanders" is proof that we won't always exercise the best taste.
Heat and noise bothers me. Not looking forward to finally upgrading my 9th gen i9 windows laptop.
It's possible that you're right about that!