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
Barely faster in single core and faster in multicore because it has more cores. Runs at a much higher TDP considering the small increase in single thread performance. Not much to crow about if you ask me.
I'd be more worried if they were slower than the M1 architecture, given the performance-per-watt.
Earth will be fine no matter what we do. It is us being able to live on earth that is in jeopardy. But we frame it as "Earth" needing our help to not seem so selfish. "Save the planet" really means "Save the humans living on the planet"
I think we missed our opportunity on that one…
rezenclowd3
macrumors 65816
Yeah one of the most surprising things was watching performance drops in Intel laptops when not plugged in. That’s insane inefficiency.
It's comparing 10 cores verses 16. Of Course it should be faster on a multi-core benchmark.
On Single Core Performance Apple M1 Max gets around 1750 to 1791, the i9-12900K gets around 1930 to 2030 and the i7-12700K around 1870 to 1900. Not a lot faster.
On Single Core Performance Apple M1 Max gets around 1750 to 1791, the i9-12900K gets around 1930 to 2030 and the i7-12700K around 1870 to 1900. Not a lot faster.
i9-12900K - Geekbench 5 CPU Search - Geekbench
browser.geekbench.com
Apple M1 Max - Geekbench 5 CPU Search - Geekbench
browser.geekbench.com
i7-12700K - Geekbench 5 CPU Search - Geekbench
browser.geekbench.com
Yeah no. You could liquid cool a 12900k 3090 8TB 128GB for far less than a loaded MBP. Heck the cpu/gpu/mb are less than $3500.
It's not at all clear that the M1s can scale to make use of much higher power levels. My guess is that we'll see multi-die SoCs with more cores, but not much higher clock rates.
It's weak. The Alder Lake S CPUs use the older Intel UHD iGPU, not the newer Xe designs. Gamers wouldn't use an iGPU anyway. It probably only exists for people who need nothing more than a desktop environment or run it in a headless server. The laptop versions will use an updated version of the Xe.
They will likely be the fastest of all. Which explains Intel’s freaking out. The PC world has held Apple at bay when power was important. They were held back with development because they depended on Intel.
Trusted Reviews doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. TechPowerUp most definitely does (W1zzard is one of the absolute BEST & most knowledgeable people in the entire tech press).
Also, if you ACTUALLY want to see what Alder Lake is capable of power efficiency wise in a desktop & how that compares to Apple's M1 architecture in mobile, look at the i7-12700K & i5-12600K, NOT the i9-12900K.
The i9-12900K has had its clock-speeds & thus voltages pushed way, WAAAAAAAAY outside the "efficiency sweet spot" for their shiny new "Intel 7" fabrication node (aka the renamed "10nm Enhanced SuperFin", which is roughly equivalent in transistor density & performance to TSMC's 7nm+, so almost a full node behind the TSMC 5nm process Apple's using). This basically means that the i9's power consumption is very nearly DOUBLED over the i7's for a VERY small performance gain (<≈0-15% in most cases).
The i9-12900K is essentially Intel's take on AMD's legendarily infamous FX-9590 (ala the lowest point of the entire Bulldozer saga). Aka take the best chip you can make and then motherf-ing CRANK those clocks & voltages up as high as technically possibly without LITERALLY blowing up motherboards, all in hopes of making it as competitive with the competition in raw performance as possible (for Intel, that'd be AMD's Zen 3D based Ryzen 6000 series launching at CES in January), power efficiency & thermals be damned.
Last edited:
People keep saying this, but PC makers always had AMD as alternative while Intel was lagging (and many have made use of that option). AMD's laptop parts are actually quite competitive with Apple's CPUs.
Intel isn't freaking out. They might have had some issues if AMD had been able to fulfill demand, which they couldn't. Meanwhile, Intel's last two generations were just rehashes of old tech allowing them to shift R&D costs to generations where they can move more units.
Lol intel has the fastest cpu in the world right now. That same movie can be done in 2 to 5 min on the Intel chip. This is also on 10nm. Just wait until next year when there 7nm chips are out. Maybe apple should of listened to intels ceo because there next arch is 20 to 30 percent faster than alderlake and will consume 20% less power. Then comes 5nm. Apple is on 5nm already and is seeing all the benefits of the smaller process. Just wait and see the next 3 years Intel will be back on top and stay there for a long time.
It’s much easier for Apple to ramp up performance than it is for Intel to meet them on energy use and heat while retaining their scores. Especially in light of the current focus on environmental costs of computing, Apple interest me more than the competition.
That's a false equvilency. Chips are made, based on the available technology, e.g., 5nm process, etc. If Apple had started years ago, with the current tech available at the time, their chips would have been not much better than what Intel produced at the time. Just because Apple started much later does not mean they became tech geniuses in one year.
Last edited:
Yeah this is gonna be the REAL test for Apple. They probably aren't looking forward to looking at that mess. What is this I am talking about? Making a Mac Pro with an M2 Max or whatever with PCIe slots even... or capability to have a Video card, which hmm that might be a tough sale... 2022 will be interesting for sure! (I mean don't forget that Thunderbolt is like a PCIe bus, but hmm Drivers)
The one thing I have learnt over the years is to never bet against Apple.