Intel Alder Lake Chips for Desktops Faster Than M1 Max in Benchmarks, But Use Much More Power

[Abazigal]

Don't understand why Apple won't offer the Intel Alder Lake at least as an option for those who need a no compromise machine. Bypassing it for the slower M1 guarantees that iMac Pros won't be very Pro.

You are unlikely to get the full performance from Alder Lake in an iMac form factor anyways, given the high power draw and heat generated. As it stands, Alder Lake only makes sense in a desktop configuration with lots of room for heat dissipation, and only the Mac Pro currently offers that (and Apple uses Xeon chips for that).

My guess is some time early next year, Apple stacks 2-4 M1 Pro / Max chips together in the iMac and benchmarks beat Alder Lake, and you still get the benefit of sustained performance in a cool and quiet environment no less.

 

[Superjonbot]

Apple is doomed!!! How can they compete with a computer that doubles as a space heater now that winter is coming!?!

 

[MathersMahmood]

This is why competition is good.

 

[Kpjoslee]

You are unlikely to get the full performance from Alder Lake in an iMac form factor anyways, given the high power draw and heat generated. As it stands, Alder Lake only makes sense in a desktop configuration with lots of room for heat dissipation, and only the Mac Pro currently offers that (and Apple uses Xeon chips for that).

My guess is some time early next year, Apple stacks 2-4 M1 Pro / Max chips together in the iMac and benchmarks beat Alder Lake, and you still get the benefit of sustained performance in a cool and quiet environment no less.

Alder Lake still performs within 90% even you bring the power down from 240w to 150w. And I posted in the other thread showing 6+8 Alder Lake at 35w has very good potential to outperform Apple M1 Max at 30w. So when Alder Lake chip is pushed to the max, it becomes power guzzler but it gets surprisingly effective when you bring the clockspeed down to reasonable level and still brings out decent performance. Not that it matters to Apple anymore but I disagree that Alder Lake only makes sense in a desktop....in fact, it makes more sense on the laptop than being pushed over its effective power/performance comfort zone on the desktop imo.

 

[Abazigal]

Alder Lake still performs within 90% even you bring the power down from 240w to 150w. And I posted in the other thread showing 6+8 Alder Lake at 35w has very good potential to outperform Apple M1 Max at 30w. So when Alder Lake chip is pushed to the max, it becomes power guzzler but it gets surprisingly effective when you bring the clockspeed down to reasonable level and still brings out decent performance. Not that it matters to Apple anymore but I disagree that Alder Lake only makes sense in a desktop....in fact, it makes more sense on the laptop than being pushed over its effective power/performance comfort zone on the desktop imo.

M1 Max also includes the equivalent of a reasonable powerful graphics card in that 92 Watt raw power, while Intel numbers are purely CPU.

 

[skitidetdu]

What would take up the space in a tower based desktop, though? Slots, normally, but Apple’s removed the need for those with the GPU being on-chip and what used to be space for AfterBurner slots ALSO being on-chip. Perhaps just room for additional internal storage? If that’s it, then it wouldn’t make for a very towery tower.

I/O cards for audio is still a thing. Especially with large studios invested in big pro tools systems.

 

[erich.j.k]

Wake me when there is a M desktop class chip to compare it to.

If Apple‘s current lineup is anything to go by, then we already have the M desktop class chip. It‘s the M1. And you wouldn‘t want to compare it with the Mac Pro.

 

[Kpjoslee]

M1 Max also includes the equivalent of a reasonable powerful graphics card in that 92 Watt raw power, while Intel numbers are purely CPU.

I thought we are talking about CPUs only? AMD and Nvidia probably took notice and are not going to stay idle either on GPU fronts. They may consider doing bigger die/slower clock approach also to complete on mobile front.
Anyways, at least it means Apple needs to keep pushing forward and stay on yearly updates and not a bad thing for us.

 

[Northiscold]

You think only Apple makes computers?

I thought we are on MacRumors, I do not care other brands' computers, especially here.

 

[Abazigal]

I thought we are talking about CPUs only? AMD and Nvidia probably took notice and are not going to stay idle either on GPU fronts. They may consider doing bigger die/slower clock approach also to complete on mobile front.
Anyways, at least it means Apple needs to keep pushing forward and stay on yearly updates and not a bad thing for us.

I suspect the M1 chip is closer to a 1.5 to 2 year upgrade schedule, rather than annually.

At the end of the day, what Apple has accomplished here is create a processor with the best of all worlds (performance, battery life, sustained performance) that the competition simply cannot hope to match. They may be able to beat the M1 variant chip in one area, but that likely comes at the expense of the other two.

This in turn allows Apple to better differentiate their hardware by creating form factors that simply won't be practical for the competition to ape, like the M1 iMac. That, at the end of the day, is Apple's primary strength here - vertical integration between hardware and software. They only need to create processors that are optimised for the type of hardware they intend to sell, and for the specific use cases they have in mind, which in turn allows them to maximise their strengths while minimising the weaknesses. For instance, Macs don't have to appeal to gamers, so that's one less area for Apple to be distracted by.

Compared to Intel and AMD which has to cater to the entire industry.

I doubt Apple will feel much pressure from them.

 

[Kpjoslee]

I suspect the M1 chip is closer to a 1.5 to 2 year upgrade schedule, rather than annually.

At the end of the day, what Apple has accomplished here is create a processor with the best of all worlds (performance, battery life, sustained performance) that the competition simply cannot hope to match. They may be able to beat the M1 variant chip in one area, but that likely comes at the expense of the other two.

This in turn allows Apple to better differentiate their hardware by creating form factors that simply won't be practical for the competition to ape, like the M1 iMac. That, at the end of the day, is Apple's primary strength here - vertical integration between hardware and software.

Apple definitely has the advantage there for now, but in the next 2-3 years, with most Intel's and AMD's SoC moving to multiple chiplet strategy, both AMD and Intel will be able to offer specialized SoCs like Apple without significant cost increase. I don't expect PC hardware will be behind for so long, and Apple needs to keep pushing forward.

For instance, Macs don't have to appeal to gamers, so that's one less area for Apple to be distracted by.

Hmmmm, some people isn't going to like that statement

Compared to Intel and AMD which has to cater to the entire industry.

I doubt Apple will feel much pressure from them.

Well, not directly. But they will always be measured against PC competitors even though their target audiences may end up being very different.

 

[matram]

The average buyer of something like an Air probably cares very little about a few percent performance, it is likely more about battery life and silent operation.

If you are a pro you will benchmark your specific workflow and buy what makes most sense for you. Apples advantage is that they now own the whole stack and can optimize software and hardware for important workflows.

 

[Le0M]

The modern iMac and Mac Mini have used mobile chips… not desktop chips.

Whatever they were, and regardless their power, Apple decided those were its iMac and Mac mini chips.

 

[Le0M]

In my opinion you are only partially correct. M1 blurs the lines in the what is mobile vs what is desktop. Apple is pushing M1 to be both and neither of the above at the same time.

Desktop like performance with mobile like efficiency.

Getting in my soapbox - I feel we need to think differently with these chips in 2 major ways.

1. The notion that dedicated cpu plus dedicated gpu combinations are always better. Traditionally that was the case but Apple’s integration solution is showing this is where the future could lie.

2. Desktop hardware is better than mobile hardware.
Apple is trying to prove that both are flawed and the answer is a product that has desktop like power with mobile like efficiency. All with zero compromise.

Impossible? In the past, very impossible. But today it is getting closer and closer to being a reality. M1 is not there yet.

What M1 is showing us is, we need to think differently about what is the best way moving forward for computer internals.

More simply, the M1 is small enough to be put in a laptop, but powerful enough to be used in desktops.
Except for the Mac Pro, the same chips that are on laptops we'll also find them on desktops.

 

[Whathappened]

No need, Cassini already took a picture of a little dot we call home.View attachment 1903997

You don’t get it. That picture shows a whole different perspective than yours.
It is your home, our home. The universe can be without our home planet but we cannot.

 

[Le0M]

iMac and Mac mini are miniature desktops made of laptop hardware (same power dissipation).

Always were. So, they are not desktops?

 

[chucker23n1]

Alder Lake still performs within 90% even you bring the power down from 240w to 150w.

Nope, 74%. https://wccftech.com/intel-maximum-...improvement-on-core-i9-12900k-alder-lake-cpu/

 

[smirking]

Apple is doomed!!! How can they compete with a computer that doubles as a space heater now that winter is coming!?!

When I had a G5 cheese grater Mac, it did double as a space heater for me and I did appreciate it in the winter!

Since those days, I've had to buy a space heater and run it in the winter.

I used to just turn on my 30" ACD and Cheese Grater. Both of those were heat monsters.

 

[cocoua]

Its amazing the leap in single core from the previous cpu family, There hasn’t been this jump since 10-15 years ago.

clearly, M1 competence its been good news for x86 technologies

 

[Kpjoslee]

Nope, 74%. https://wccftech.com/intel-maximum-...improvement-on-core-i9-12900k-alder-lake-cpu/

That is 125W. I said 150W.

 

[cknlol]

You are unlikely to get the full performance from Alder Lake in an iMac form factor anyways, given the high power draw and heat generated. As it stands, Alder Lake only makes sense in a desktop configuration with lots of room for heat dissipation, and only the Mac Pro currently offers that (and Apple uses Xeon chips for that).

My guess is some time early next year, Apple stacks 2-4 M1 Pro / Max chips together in the iMac and benchmarks beat Alder Lake, and you still get the benefit of sustained performance in a cool and quiet environment no less.

That's all fine and I'm cheering Apple for this. But I do need Windows

 

[citysnaps]

Don't understand why Apple won't offer the Intel Alder Lake at least as an option for those who need a no compromise machine. Bypassing it for the slower M1 guarantees that iMac Pros won't be very Pro.

That would be a huge distraction for Apple and their roadmap, and at a greater cost. And there's cooling.

Charge ahead, not sideways.

 

[TheMacDaddy1]

Obviously it matters, or they would see no need to innovate and try to catch up. if it doesn’t matter to them, then they are dumb and should quit the business. The fact is they have fallen behind, and the efficiency - or lack thereof - of their chips clearly shows they have lost the lead.

I was talking about the end user. All this talk about Apple’s chips being so power efficient and cool in comparison. That’s great but no gamer cares.

 

[krspkbl]

a desktop CPU is faster and users more power than a laptop CPU?

is this really the story here? lol.

these CPUs are designed to run in systems that plug into the wall 24/7 and have a lot of airflow with beefy air coolers or even liquid cooling. yeah a macbook can plug into the wall but the fans are tiny in comparison and there is very little airflow. also these new Intel CPUs run with DDR5 + PCIE 5.0 which isn't something Apple have implemented yet. they are two totally different products.

maybe wait until we get the new 27" iMac. that will be a more fair comparison but not totally. Apple might be able to run those chips faster (which, get this, will require more power). but will still probably be restricted by thermals and the M1 Pro/Max use last gen DDR/PCIE so they will physically not be able to keep up with Intel Alder Lake.

i know this is an apple forum so we must have nothing but praise for Tim Apple and we all like to **** on Intel but this is ripping it.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I/O cards for audio is still a thing. Especially with large studios invested in big pro tools systems.

I’m actually still looking for audio cards as it appears most of the major vendors have gone the USB route. There may not be a big enough “internal” market left.