M2 will use the same cores as A15. Arm v9 is not faster, anyway.
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
Good question… they do make extensive use of mobile processors, but the higher end iMacs used parts defined by Intel as desktop (like the 10700K)
Really looking forward to seeing the laptop chips. Everyone keeps talking about tdp and what not, which is fair, but power and performance is not linear. To match the m1 max, Intel will need 66% of their desktop performance, it will need much less than 66% of the power (just look at apples own curves of power/performance for x86 chips.)
The power will still be higher obviously in the Intel, but if performance is similar then I’d still rather have an Intel mbp for the flexibility of running windows natively…
The power will still be higher obviously in the Intel, but if performance is similar then I’d still rather have an Intel mbp for the flexibility of running windows natively…
There will be fewer cores in their mobile solution, so, as always, (and by design) their laptops won’t encroach on their desktop performance.
I mean, of course they won’t encroach, but getting 2/3 of the way there (to match the m1 pro/max) isn’t really encroaching.
I see your point, but regardless their entire Apple Event/Keynote was based on M1 Pro/Max comparison to Intel/AMD or equivalent in terms of CPU/GPU performance and efficiency. So your case can not be effective on what you are trying to say.
Based on Apple's presentation they are trying stand out and be the best. They are looking to take control of their entire supply chain process from start to finish.
I can name several coworkers who are, though the workstation runs Linux. Energy efficiency isn't on the top of priorities for many desktop users, though it was for me (see sig).
The iMacs usually used desktop line https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/index-imac.html
I keep clicking on the different models, but they're all indicating mobile processors, including the last i9...
"This model is powered by a 14 nm, 64-bit "10th Generation" Intel Mobile Core i9 "Comet Lake" (I9-10910) processor which includes ten independent processor "cores" on a single silicon chip"
Maybe just a few were desktop class?
The thing is, if they got 2/3rds of the way there with a mobile part, that would cannibalize the profits they’re trying to make on their desktop parts… which are the ones they want people to buy to get 2/3rds of the way there. They’re removing cores on their mobile solutions not because they HAVE to, but because they need to create tiers of performance for folks to buy into.
Again, I don’t think it’s that Intel CAN’T do well with mobile, their business counts on them not doing as well as they actually could.
that’s a desktop cpu. most imac cpu’s were desktop. i’m not sure why everymac is describing them as mobile chips
Last edited:
In their presentation, they clearly showed that you can get better top end performance with non Apple Silicon solutions, just not at the same power level. They’ll likely repeat the same in the future. They don’t seem really concerned about being clear on the fact that, at any point in time, their solutions may not be fastest.
mac mini = mobile cpu
imac = desktop cpu
mac pro = workstation cpu
for nearly all of intel mac lifetime
Apples and Bananas. Intel have nothing to compare with the M series. You have compared a desktop CPU with a mobile CPU. Expect throttling to manage temperature and a battery life of a couple of hours if Intel ever get this CPU in to a laptop. Write your review when Intel truly have a comparative product.
to be fair apple doesn’t have a desktop chip yet. works both ways
I think you underestimate just how many of the ARM instructions actually come from Apple in the first place.
Intel's Tiger Lake (and AMD's Cezanne) are actually not far behind the M1 Max in terms of performance. We'll soon see what the Alder Lake laptop parts can do.
The M1 Max can also run the battery down in a couple of hours depending on the load.
Apple obviously benefits a lot from being first to market with a computer CPU manufactured using TSMC's 5nm process. It saves power and allows them to add more logic and cache capacity at a given die size.
Last edited:
Apple isn’t comparing their laptops to competitor’s desktop systems, are they? They stick to reasonable comparisons of similar laptops.
neither intel nor apple are doing the comparing here, its anandtech and macrumors
apple does, however, always compare their new hardware to whatever their previous lowest spec system was to get their "up to n times faster than..." taglines
Last edited:
Apple is much better than Intel, as long as you don't watch YouTube, but nobody needs YouTube, right ;-)
Intel last week unveiled its first 12th-generation "Alder Lake" processors with the launch of six new processors aimed at desktop computers, including the high-end Core i9-12900K, a 16-core chip with eight performance cores and eight efficiency cores.
While the first 12th-generation processors are desktop class, they still make for an interesting comparison with Apple's M1 Pro and M1 Max chips in the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models, as rumors suggest that Apple plans to release a new 27-inch iMac with the same M1 Pro and M1 Max chips in the first half of next year.
The first Geekbench 5 benchmark results for the Core i9-12900K reveal that the processor is up to nearly 1.5x faster than the M1 Pro and M1 Max in multi-core performance. Specifically, the Core i9 processor has an average multi-core score of approximately 18,500 so far, compared to approximately 12,500 for the M1 Pro and M1 Max. AnandTech has shared additional benchmarks for a closer look at performance.
While the Core i9 processor is considerably faster than the M1 Pro and M1 Max, it also uses a lot more power than Apple's chips, with Intel listing the chip as using up to 125W of power at base frequencies and up to 241W of power with Turbo Boost.
Intel's 12th-generation Core i7-12700K also appears to be faster than the M1 Pro and M1 Max in Geekbench 5 results, but it likewise uses more power.
When Apple first announced that it would be transitioning to its own chips for the Mac in June 2020, the company never said its chips would be the fastest on the market, but rather promised industry-leading performance per watt. Apple's M1 Pro and M1 Max certainly achieve this feat, with the chips outperforming a 12-core Intel-based Mac Pro that starts at $6,999 with minimal to no fan noise as a result of impressive power efficiency.
Intel expects to release 12th-generation Core processors for laptops in early 2022.
Article Link: Intel Alder Lake Chips for Desktops Faster Than M1 Max in Benchmarks, But Use Much More Power
