Yes sure that perfectly defines the usecase for an average power user on a laptop.
When was Apple Silicon ever a performance boss? They’ve always been faster than the most recently released Mac of that form factor, but those Macs weren’t anywhere near the top of the pack when you take into account what the competition was shipping at the time. I don’t think there’s ever been a time when an interested party wouldn’t have been able to go to AMD or Intel and plop down a chunk of change and acquire a CPU and/or GPU that’s faster than whatever Apple was shipping at the time.
We were talking mobile chips.
I believe you are mistaken. M1 wasn’t only “near the top”, it was at the very top - ahead of anything Intel or AMD was shipping upon its release.
No, not always. This chip is going to be used in gaming laptops and mobile workstations. Their users almost never use their laptops unplugged.Intel might have faster chips... but lets see if they hit their full performance in a laptop unplugged from power... or how long the battery lasts.
It's been said that Apple's laptops run at full speed when unplugged. And they get great battery life.
That's definitely something people look for in a laptop.
A very sensible and level headed comment that I like very much and I wholeheartedly agree. I'm very curious to see how Apple responds to the x86 incumbents. Either way, competiion is great for us consumers! And based on what I'm seeing at CES 2023, competion is about to get even more stiff and I am getting excited! Looking forward to Apple's 3nm designs!
Ye something that isn't complete garbage like windows and Mac OhShi1t, I guess Linux
Well when Apple released their M1 line 2 years ago, it was vastly superior to i5 and i7 of that current Intel generation, some results even showed it better for video editing than an i9.
You’re talking mobile chips, and that’s the same line Apple was touting.
Apple’s NEVER said their processors provide the highest raw performance. As long as one looks at the market in a VERY particular way. Effectively, if one excludes ALL the processors that beat Apple’s Silicon on raw performance, then remarkably, they lead!
I think you need a refresher. Please go and check M1 threads from 2020.You’re talking mobile chips, and that’s the same line Apple was touting.
In order for Apple to have been leapfrogged, they’d have had to have been in the lead in some way. They haven’t been as far as raw performance is concerned (unless, again, one excludes all the processors that beat Apple’s in raw performance). Apple IS behind, has always BEEN behind and they’re going to continue to fall further behind.
www.macrumors.com
Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree. Apple’s Silicon is impressive, to be sure, but there were certainly faster processors out there. It’s funny to think that someone believes that the M1 (which was first released in mobile form) was faster than every Intel system, even the custom built ones. BUT, I think that’s what people have to believe in order to sound the “Apple is NOW being beaten”. They’ve been beaten since day one nothing has changed!
Apple’s new computers are faster than Apple’s older computers. That has always and will always be true for a given form factor. Are you attempting to use THIS information to say that Apple’s MacBook Air was a performance boss? Because there were MANY non-Apple Intel builds that provided better performance.I think you need a refresher. Please go and check M1 threads from 2020.
View attachment 2137247
View attachment 2137248
Apple Silicon M1 Chip in MacBook Air Outperforms High-End 16-Inch MacBook Pro
Apple introduced the first MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac mini with M1 Apple Silicon chips yesterday, and as of today, the first benchmark of the...
Those that are looking for raw peak performance are not turned away by the cost of the solution. They’re not turned away by how much energy it takes to power the solution. They’re not turned away by how loud or how heavy the solution is. Whatever gets them peak performance is what they’re putting down money for. THIS is why there has been and there will ALWAYS be some Intel system that’s faster than whatever Apple puts out. Because manufacturers know how to build and tweak for peak performance and they’ve got customers willing to pay for that additional performance. And, those customers will never find that in any Apple Silicon system (except for some specific cases where the architecture of the SoC provides benefits not attainable on non-Apple Silicon systems).
So that's your take from a comparison of Macbooks running entry level Apple Silicon chips thrashing Performance tier Intel Macbooks from the same year?
That's a huge load of prejudice that has nothing to do with industry standards for chip comparisons, unfortunately. Apple literally shocked the processor industry in 2020, and 2 years later Intel has fought and won that battle pretty well.
Will someone be able to buy a computer with the Intel mobile processor for less than $4000, properly equipped to deal with the heat and power requirements?
You are absolutely correct. Without a doubt. People can and should use what works for them and makes them happy. I am just poking fun at the all-too-often sight of people painfully leaning to one side walking through the airport because their briefcase is weighed down with these ugly (incredibly fast, no doubt) bricks. Seriously, whatever makes them happy, no shade, it was a light hearted joke, because we all know even that battery pack would only power one of those hogs for about 5 mins anyway (ok, ok, I'll stop!).
My RTX 3050 Ti and Ryzen 7 5800H do a great job, on and off AC power.
