the winning move.
pc games on my bootcamp'd mac > exporting video 5 minutes faster.
a $6k m1 max will not run bbedit, dayone, omnifocus or fantastical any better than my 2019 Macbook Pro 16
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 Says New Core i9 Processor for Laptops is Faster Than Apple's M1 Max Chip
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
the winning move.
pc games on my bootcamp'd mac > exporting video 5 minutes faster.
a $6k m1 max will not run bbedit, dayone, omnifocus or fantastical any better than my 2019 Macbook Pro 16
You can easily run down the battery of an M1 laptop in 2-3 hours. It all depends on the workload.
That doesn't really mean much if the "full performance" is not the same ...The new Core i9 mobile CPU needs supposedly 115 watts of power to run a full performance--not including the separate GPU chipset, which may add another (in my estimation!) 50-70 watts or so. Meanwhile, the M1 Max uses 90 , watts max running at full performance. I'm not impressed, Intel.
Easily? How. I haven’t managed it with all cores pegged at 100% on an M1 Max. I did get 6 hours that way, though.
Do they state how much the heat of the intel will add to global warming?
I upgraded from a 2015 MBP to a 2021 MBP with the MAX chip. The performance is astronomically better. Can anyone tell me why as I was doing internet recovery on the 2015 to wipe it that the entire fans are blazing and the computer is ready to boil an egg over INTERNET RECOVERY. Don't miss intel. (Maybe I do miss bootcamp just a touch though)
Yep. They were pretty crap especially in recent years when Intel started increasing performance by doubling the number of CPU cores (and therefore doubling the power and heat issues).
It got to the point even plugged into power they could flatten the battery in a few hours under high load. Because the power brick didn’t provide anywhere near enough power.
Seeing the line of how the AMD chip performs makes the whole graph look suspicious. AMD does better than this in realistic workloads. Also what’s with the graph not showing performance around the 10W-20W mark where so much laptop usage needs to occur? This is a desktop graph for mobile chips. Really weird
So according to their own graph their brand new not yet released 14-core chip in the labs is about 15% faster than 10-core M1 Max from last year at the same wattage (35)? What a surprise! Well, Apple is going to release M2 this year so that 15% won't last long I guess.
As soon as the heat rises the Intel chip will throttle itself. Also, my Intel MacBook Pro has to be plugged in to achieve full power so compiling code is fast. So annoying to have to be tethered to a power cord to get performance. I so badly want one of the new MacBook pros.
On full load, The M1 Pro/Max CPU consumes about 35W sustained. In my benchmarks, I've gotten to 34W. Package power will be a few watts higher. The 14 MBP has a 70Wh battery, while the 16" has 100Wh. How on earth would you get more than 2 respectively 3 hours of full load use out of it?
Add the GPU: On my M1 Pro I've been able to push it to 26W sustained, so an M1 Max should reach at least 50W. Add CPU overhead to your task, and you're looking at 60W sustained power consumption on a M1 Max under full load.
How that equates to 6 hour battery life on a 70 or 100Wh battery is beyond me.
Last edited by a moderator:
Absolutely. And with the Mx series, Apple makes for three major processor players, rather than just two playing leapfrog at a pace slow enough for them to milk the consumer at every leap.
Sure, the I9 is a great processor. And I'll probably build a new Windows PC sometime in '22 or '23 with it. While my MBP, coming in February, will also get used.
As we say, competition is good.
Yep, probably true. My plans for an Intel PC are similar to yours.Well... considering no Macintosh laptop will ever have an Intel processor again... I don't really care what Intel says...
And BTW... I don't hate Intel. I will be building a 12th-gen Intel desktop PC this summer.
But I don't think Intel chips belong in Mac laptops anymore. And they won't be.
What are you talking about..."agitated"? That's just silly, at least for the first 2 pages that I've read so far. Some for Apple, some like the Intel solution. Others, like me, are just gluttons who want it all. ?
Getting "agitated" (which really hasn't happened anyway) wouldn't be constructive. Calm down; there's no drama to see here.
Wow, so maybe there is some "agitation" going on after all. Nichole, let me introduce you to Applicious in the post above. Tell me, are you two going to arm wrestle this one? Or maybe thumb wrestle it? ?While I think it's unlikely, it would crack me up to no end if Intel ends up re-taking the power/performance lead over Apple at some point in the next few years. Just to enjoy seeing all the Apple fanboys scratching their heads
Your sarcasm is well placed and that's a good observation right there. AMD came back from the dead to finally compete with Intel, and then both of them just got lazy. But of course, Covid hit too, so there's that. But still, a third player is a good thing. Let the games begin!
I find it interesting when PCs are put head to head with the M1 Pros and Max’s. So many comparisons leave 1 essential aspect out. They talk about efficiency but what does that really mean besides battery life. When you put a top of the line Intel next to the M1 Max’s, yes the top performance is similar. And obviously the Mac will get better battery life, but here’s the thing. When you try and do more then literally 1 thing, run more then 1 program on the PC. It turns to ****. While the M1 Max can literally have 10-20 apps open with almost zero slow down. This very thing is omitted so often, even when the reviewer is praising the Mac. And it’s completely selling the Mac short. And IMO is why the Max silicon is vastly superior.
So the latest in a long very long line of chips is faster than only the second generation of a brand new chip set
well done you , intel ?
well done you , intel ?
I wonder how hot it will run and how much fan noise will it produce?
Intel today unveiled new 12th-generation Core processors suitable for laptops, and as part of the announcement, it claimed that the new Core i9 is not only faster than Apple's M1 Max chip in the 16-inch MacBook Pro, but is the fastest mobile processor ever.
The new Core i9 features a 14-core CPU with six performance cores and eight efficiency cores, while the 10-core M1 Max chip has eight performance cores and two efficiency cores. The high-end Intel chip has a max Turbo Boost frequency of 5.0GHz, but power draw can reach up to 115 watts, which is significantly more power than the M1 Max chip ever uses and not ideal for the thermal envelope of devices like the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro.
Intel shared a very basic performance vs. power chart as part of its marketing, with fine print indicating that performance was measured based on compiling binaries with the SPEC CPU 2017 benchmark suite. Interestingly, the chart claims that the new Core i9 achieved faster performance-per-watt than the M1 Max chip, but overall the M1 Max can still operate at much lower wattages than Intel's top-of-the-line mobile offering.
"Specrate 2017 integer n-copy data is a good benchmark that we use to gauge client multi-threaded performance, and our data indicates that the Core i9-12900HK is faster performance-per-watt than the M1 Max processor in this test," an Intel spokesperson told MacRumors, when asked for comment about the results.
Of course, we'll have to wait to see how the 12th-generation Core processors perform in real-world testing for a true comparison with the M1 Max chip.
Intel's new chips are certainly fast, but Apple likely has no regrets with switching to its own custom silicon given the power efficiency of its chips, which deliver impressive performance without running hot in thin and light systems like the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro. And we're likely just months away from Apple unveiling its next-generation M2 chip that should take another leap forward in performance-per-watt.
Intel's 12th-generation mobile Core processor lineup includes 28 chips, including mid-range and low-end Core i7 and Core i5 options. The chips have entered final production and devices powered by them are expected to launch this year.
Article Link: Intel Says New Core i9 Processor for Laptops is Faster Than Apple's M1 Max Chip
If you're NOT up to speed on Intel's Thread Director, highly recommend you, meaning anyone who isn't, look into it.
Apple refers to theirs as the Performance Controller.
It's where a fair amount of a processor's secret sauce is these days.
BTW, the A11 & A12 had a Performance Controller chip bug, that affected at least one high perf iOS app.
To this date, AAPL has never once fessed-up about it.
The gist, as the Performance Controller / Thread Director designs become fancier & fancier, NO guarantee they don't screw-up somewhere with it !
The A10 does NOT have a Performance Controller, & because of that, works flawlessly & with high-performance !
Apple fixed the problem with the A13.
So that, & ALL newer A-series chips are solid.
Apple refers to theirs as the Performance Controller.
It's where a fair amount of a processor's secret sauce is these days.
BTW, the A11 & A12 had a Performance Controller chip bug, that affected at least one high perf iOS app.
To this date, AAPL has never once fessed-up about it.
The gist, as the Performance Controller / Thread Director designs become fancier & fancier, NO guarantee they don't screw-up somewhere with it !
The A10 does NOT have a Performance Controller, & because of that, works flawlessly & with high-performance !
Apple fixed the problem with the A13.
So that, & ALL newer A-series chips are solid.
Sigh…….
?♀️
Too little, too late Intel.
Besides, Apple and AMD has already beaten this spec in their upcoming chips.
