Common people, Intel has come up with a processor cum toaster oven. Give them some credit.
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.
Intel Alder Lake Chips for Desktops Faster Than M1 Max in Benchmarks, But Use Much More Power
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This thread is so disingenuous.
Anyone would here would use more power out of their MacBook if it meant better performance.
Anyone would here would use more power out of their MacBook if it meant better performance.
In practically, for most consumers, any decent laptop computer in the last 7-10 years has been adequate for normal web browsing, video streaming, music, word processing, and most consumer photo editing. Until recently, the only typical workload that pushed a laptop computer was very hign-end photo or video editing. Now with machines like the M! Pro that for all practically purposes even 8K is the new 1080P. Certainly 4k is almost coasting. And gamers are never satiated apparently with even the latest CPU/GPU. It just their game. 
With all that being said, I got a 16in Mac Pro primally just for the screen. If it had an M1 option, I gladly would have taken it. Perhaps the Spring follow-up to the M1 Air' might have a min-led HDR screen with ProMotion.
But then perhaps not. The old bird in hand vs bush waiting game. I just played it today. And no worst then the old Intel 16 MacBook Pro +$100. $100 upgrade well spent vs just a few days ago. Even a close-out 16 Intel MacBook today seems like a bad deal.
And a decent external OLED monitor is several hundreds to thousands of dollars including Apple's own HDR Pro 32 in display. And most wold not be as good a screen as on the new 16 Mack. So, I just see my 16 in M1 Pro has a machine that has a very good display and just happens to have a nice, powerful, cool running SoC design. A very nice design, I might add.
With all that being said, I got a 16in Mac Pro primally just for the screen. If it had an M1 option, I gladly would have taken it. Perhaps the Spring follow-up to the M1 Air' might have a min-led HDR screen with ProMotion.
But then perhaps not. The old bird in hand vs bush waiting game. I just played it today. And no worst then the old Intel 16 MacBook Pro +$100. $100 upgrade well spent vs just a few days ago. Even a close-out 16 Intel MacBook today seems like a bad deal.
And a decent external OLED monitor is several hundreds to thousands of dollars including Apple's own HDR Pro 32 in display. And most wold not be as good a screen as on the new 16 Mack. So, I just see my 16 in M1 Pro has a machine that has a very good display and just happens to have a nice, powerful, cool running SoC design. A very nice design, I might add.
Last edited:
Only a matter of time before Apple silicon overtakes this one.
It's going to be the same chip as in the MBPs for the iMac. The base iMac shipped with the "mobile" M1 chip, remember?
The only unknown is what is going into to the Mac Pro.
Oh, your phrasing just jogged my brain into associating Apple silicon with BMW’s M division ?
But without battery to worry about and more space they can upclock it to close the performance gap, while still drawing less power and running cooler and quieter.
Then comes the Mac Pro which will probably combine 2-4 M1 Max for up to 40 CPU cores and 128 GPU cores, 8 accelerated ProRes video pipelines, and 4X 16-core neural engines.
Well, we do expect the exact same “mobile CPU”s in the upcoming iMac and Mac mini, i.e. desktops, so this is a good comparison IMHO.
Calling these new Intels “considerably faster” but using far more power gives good food for thought for consumers who will be choosing between a fast desktop PC or Mac.
Yeah, it’s definitely still very much so leashed, quite literally because of power issues. Once it can be left on the desk and not in the lap who cares how hot it gets and much it burns up the power lines. Drive intel into the ground!
Last edited:
Yeah, and without an integrated gpu? You guess you’ ll also need a dedicated gpu to do an equal comparison, so you can add about 100 watts(bare minimum)
Let me see if I got this straight:
A Desktop computer chip not yet in full production (could be years away if history serves me) can be intermittently 50% faster. ' Only for limited periods even in a water cooled system. 'Is useful to heat the house (not good here in Florida though).
A Laptop computer chip not yet in full production (could be years away if history serves me) can be intermittently 10% faster. ' Only for limited periods even in a noisy air cooled system. 'Is useful to make toast (OK in Florida but making grits would be better).
...Is compared with a chip in actual production that can run at full speed with the fan running but almost inaudible. The system gives off essentially no heat with normal use. My wife just got the 14" laptop. Her older 13" MacBook Pro got warm with normal use. My 2019 16" MBP can get hot with normal use, especially on just the Macrumors web site.
Then there is the GPU that needs to be considered for added heat in the Intel systems...
Ali
A Desktop computer chip not yet in full production (could be years away if history serves me) can be intermittently 50% faster. ' Only for limited periods even in a water cooled system. 'Is useful to heat the house (not good here in Florida though).
A Laptop computer chip not yet in full production (could be years away if history serves me) can be intermittently 10% faster. ' Only for limited periods even in a noisy air cooled system. 'Is useful to make toast (OK in Florida but making grits would be better).
...Is compared with a chip in actual production that can run at full speed with the fan running but almost inaudible. The system gives off essentially no heat with normal use. My wife just got the 14" laptop. Her older 13" MacBook Pro got warm with normal use. My 2019 16" MBP can get hot with normal use, especially on just the Macrumors web site.
Then there is the GPU that needs to be considered for added heat in the Intel systems...
Ali
On the other side of the scale. I need X job doing in X time, if the efficient one won't do it what use is it?
Maybe they will have a special desktop class of chips - D1, D1 Pro, D1 Max. Use that in the Mac Pro.
Hope this makes apple consider iMacs with options to stack the chips then, some 2x Maxes or something.
While interesting, coming from Intel I always find these benchmark statements a bit rushed… it’s a cpu that hasn’t been released yet from a company that gets into serious delays.
While interesting, coming from Intel I always find these benchmark statements a bit rushed… it’s a cpu that hasn’t been released yet from a company that gets into serious delays.
You have never built a desktop computer before? Of course you have to pay for all of those thing and of course you will have leeway in performance, cooling and screen estate compared to a laptop.
So heat is the new game. It's only Apple that had heat issues with Intel chipsets, none of the leading PC laptop manufacturers had issues with noisy fans and heat with the same chipset as much as Apple did especially with dedicated GPU which would melt down eventually if you use it everyday and do not dust away the chassis once a year. I ditched MBPs long time ago for VAIO (like 18 years ago) but I do always have one latest MBP under my desk for some portable Mac stuff just in case, right now I have both Mini and MBP with M1. I rarely did anything on MBP but that's because we were stacked with Apple desktops, but when I did I regulary got worse performance than with VAIO laptops in the same size and Intel cpu category. Apple has tried to differentiate themselves from other Intel vendors by showcasing substance instead of performance since day one.
Goes to show just how impressive the Apple Silicon chips are. “Desktop chip faster than laptop chip” wouldn’t have been a headline any time in the last 20 years until now.