Is M1 base really that superior to Intel i9 or i7?

[Bodhitree]

You miss out on expandability for future needs.

I built a Windows desktop and it looks great, and it runs cool and quiet and it's efficient. Those were my design goals.

I don’t think the expandability is such a big deal. It only really matters if you try and upgrade a ten year old machine to run acceptably today, and even then such a machine comes with all sorts of compromises in the processor, bus speeds, peripherals and so on.

My experience is that a consumer machine rarely gets any upgrades. Apple will have done their research and realised that the vast majority of their customers would be fine with just a few options at the point of purchase. If it bothers you, get an M1 with the 16 GB ram upgrade.

As for Windows desktops looking great, well, perhaps your home built machine was an exception. Most of them are clunkers.

 

[pshufd]

I don’t think the expandability is such a big deal. It only really matters if you try and upgrade a ten year old machine to run acceptably today, and even then such a machine comes with all sorts of compromises in the processor, bus speeds, peripherals and so on.

My experience is that a consumer machine rarely gets any upgrades. Apple will have done their research and realised that the vast majority of their customers would be fine with just a few options at the point of purchase. If it bothers you, get an M1 with the 16 GB ram upgrade.

As for Windows desktops looking great, well, perhaps your home built machine was an exception. Most of them are clunkers.

I use a cluster approach. I will use several weaker machines working cooperatively instead of a high-powered system.

The typical consumer isn't going to open up an iMac so they sell it for next to nothing when they are done with it unless someone tells them that they can upgrade it. It makes for some really fantastic deals. I look for old iMacs with HDDs and little RAM because the experience is awful for whoever is using it. The thing is, if you look on YouTube, you'll find lots of videos on how to upgrade your old Mac and there are lots of teenagers that go this route. Not really much different from fixing a leaky faucet over calling a plumber.

 

[MajorFubar]

I think when considering an Apple computer you have to look at the whole package. The design of the machine, the speed of the processor, coolness, quiet, battery life, the software that comes with the machine, the operating system, price.

...and the software you are able to use that Windows users cannot, often at very reasonable prices. I'm a massive Logic Pro user, and I'm old enough to remember it costing ProTools money to buy when it was made by eMagic, not $200.

Any discussion I've had with Windows users who claim to be running a more powerful home studio for considerably less money usually teases out the truth that they're running pirated software that should have cost them upwards of a grand to buy.

 

[pshufd]

...and the software you are able to use that Windows users cannot, often an very reasonable prices. I'm a massive Logic Pro user, and I'm old enough to remember it costing ProTools money to buy when it was made by eMagic, not $200.

Any discussion I've had with Windows users who claim to be running a more powerful home studio for considerably less money usually eventually teases out the truth that they're running pirated software that should have cost them upwards of a grand to buy.

It makes old iMacs a great value. I got all of the iCloud services for $100 fixed price, along with all of the hardware of course.

I'm surprised that Apple doesn't have DRM for their software.

 

[Luis Ortega]

I've not yet seen a comparison with an Alder Lake Hackintosh. I'd guess that the Alder Lake comes out on top.

Apple Silicon is a great architecture but the original M1 implementation has a lot of limitations.

Apple is known for throttling specs and doling them out in future releases to keep the customers spending money on newer gear.

 

[MajorFubar]

Apple is known for throttling specs and doling them out in future releases to keep the customers spending money on newer gear.

All manufacturers do this, with all tech products. That one thing you wish your current TV could do but can't? Its replacement will be able to do it. They could fire a firmware update to yours to give it the functionality, but they'd rather you went out and bought a new TV.

 

[iBug2]

Some things will be faster and some will be slower.

I was offered a 2017 iMac Pro, 18 cores, Vega 56, 64 GB RAM and 2 TB SSD for $1,900 a month ago. I'm kicking myself for not buying it. It was at an auction house and they thought that the 18 meant i8 so they priced it like a 2020 iMac i7. That Vega 56 could probably handle your girlfriend's workload just fine. There is a reason why Apple still sells the Intel iMac 27.

I'm thinking that Apple wants to go with 12 performance cores in the iMac 27 as the 2017 iMac Pro 18-core Xeon outperforms the M1 MAX in Geekbench 5 Multicore. It outperforms the M1 MAX in OpenCL too.

Yeah, but the thing is, even my iPad Pro with A12Z was faster than my iMac in GPU accelerated photo editing. And that's not even M1.


M series chips are nothing like Intel. I think you dodged a bullet. An M1 Pro Macbook Pro would be faster than that iMac Pro in 99% of the tasks. Not even M1 Max.

 

[pshufd]

All manufacturers do this, with all tech products. That one thing you wish your current TV could do but can't? Its replacement will be able to do it. They could fire a firmware update to yours to give it the functionality, but they'd rather you went out and bought a new TV.

My 2018 Toyota Camry doesn't display real-time tire pressure. My 2012 does. They moved that feature to a higher trim level. The sensor is still there, they just don't report the values. I bought a 2000 Avalon ages ago and it didn't have the HEPA filtration option. That was in the higher trim level for $10,000 more. Three years later, the service writer asked me if I wanted to put a HEPA filter in. It appears that everything is there for HEPA filtration. You just had to put in the filter.

 

[pshufd]

Yeah, but the thing is, even my iPad Pro with A12Z was faster than my iMac in GPU accelerated photo editing. And that's not even M1.


M series chips are nothing like Intel. I think you dodged a bullet. An M1 Pro Macbook Pro would be faster than that iMac Pro in 99% of the tasks. Not even M1 Max.

It's not faster for WINE programs. I have one critical program that was written on frameworks from the 1990s. It runs like a dog on Apple Silicon and the Reddit forum has bitched and complained about it for the past year. There's no indication that they are going to do a native port for Apple Silicon. They don't have a native port for macOS Intel and people have been asking for it since 2006. It will not work when Rosetta 2 goes away.

 

[darngooddesign]

Even if performance were similar, which it isn't, the M1s are superior for the silence they provide.

 

[Bandaman]

The Air will slow down if asked to do multithreaded tasks for long periods of time - it has no fan, so it can't sustain peak performance forever. And Geekbench only measures peak since the tests run for short periods of time. If you were doing something that exercised all cores for long periods of time, the 2019 would likely be faster.

If this is something which concerns you, you'd want to upgrade to the 13" MacBook Pro at minimum. It has a fan and will maintain the performance as measured in Geekbench indefinitely.

I did see comparison tests a long time ago where, in some workloads, the late 2019 i9 could beat a M1. But in general, yes that performance is real. The M1 is very good relative to what Intel was making in 2019.

On RAM - If you actually need 32GB, you still need 32GB. Lots of people get confused ideas about how RAM relates to performance. The real way to look at it is that once you have enough RAM, your software will run as fast as it can given the CPU and GPU you've got, and if you don't have enough RAM, performance will suffer. There's usually not a lot of benefit to more RAM than that minimum amount.

Basically, if your workload causes tons of swapping at 16GB RAM, and little or none at 32GB, you want 32 for sure. If you think that's the case, look at a 14" or 16" with M1 Pro. (and as an additional benefit, these machines will offer a substantial performance upgrade over the M1 13" and Air, especially for any software which uses the GPU.)

I have a desk fan pointed toward me and the Air which eliminates the sustained loads problem. The battery life and the performance while being unplugged have been the real winners of this device. I never was expecting it be the best at everything, but I can tell you it stomps all over my high end gaming laptop when not plugged in.

 

[Acronyc]

It really does depend on how much GPU you need and what software is running. The M1 series GPUs use tile based rendering and a bunch of other tricks that will really shine with metal for example.

I've been pretty impressed with the base model M1 PRO Gpu in mine, even running Baldurs Gate 3.

But comparing a base m1 to an iMac or other device with discrete GPU or eGPU isn't really fair.

I know it's not a base model MPB/MBA, but the GPU in my 14-inch M1 Max is much faster than the eGPU I used to use (RX580 with 8GB of RAM) with my 2016 MBP. Yes, the RX580 is old, but to have more performance than I did before without a loud and large eGPU taking up desk space is really awesome.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I'm surprised that Apple doesn't have DRM for their software.

They DO have DRM, it’s just that their dongle is so big, most confuse it for a computer

 

[SalisburySam]

Is M1 base really that superior to Intel i9 or i7?​

Very interesting discussion here on performance, future-proofing, market forces, yatta, yatta. But I think the answer to the question is: does it matter? If you wish to stay within the Apple ecosystem on new products, it isn’t going to be on i9/i7 processors. If you make your Apple vs. PC decision based on the processor, then that’s a bit different but nobody here says (so far) they do that. So again, is this question and thread just an academic exercise, because there’s soon to be no real choice in the Apple product line.

 

[Adarna]

On Geekbench, I'm seeing that the scores of MacBook Air M1 is superior to that of a MacBook Pro 2019 16" or MacBook Pro 2018 15" using an Intel i9.

Therefore, it's possible that a tiny 13-inch MacBook Air M1 is more powerful than the most cutting edge of MacBooks released in 2019 and 2018, correct? Or am I missing something here?

Also, am I right in assuming the MBA M1 is going to handle my 3D and motion design tasks better than the 2019 and 2018 models even if those models had 32GB RAM?

(Context: I'm new to M1 and haven't really educated myself on its power yet.)

View attachment 1952945

The benchmarks are specific to those tasks.

Look for benchmarks specific to the apps you use.

If you play Mac games that are Intel-only then odds are they will not perform as well on an M1

 

[clevins]

The Air will slow down if asked to do multithreaded tasks for long periods of time - it has no fan, so it can't sustain peak performance forever. And Geekbench only measures peak since the tests run for short periods of time. If you were doing something that exercised all cores for long periods of time, the 2019 would likely be faster.

If this is something which concerns you, you'd want to upgrade to the 13" MacBook Pro at minimum.

I disagree. If you routinely to work with demanding loads for long stretches get the 14" MacBook Pro and 32gig.

Mr_roboto is on target and while the Air and 13" Pro are very fast, they do have limits related to thermals and, of course, RAM. Note that they also can only drive a single external screen which is important for some work styles.

Now... COULD you use the 13" Pro for a workload that's challenging and beat an i9? Yes. But you're likely better off with the more capable 14" and the extra RAM which will give you more overhead. HOWEVAH.. if the 32gig i9 is overspecced and you really could do your work fine with a 16gig i7, the M1s will be far better.

Final points - the M1 will do a given workload for longer than the Intel machines when on battery, so if that's important, it's a big point for the M1s. The main downside to an M1 is that you can't run x86 Windows so if you need to do that for any important reason you'd need to get a windows machine.

 

[clevins]

The question of how things work in real life is interesting. I have an M1 mini 16/512 on my desktop and it was nice but it could slow down if you're running a lot of things on it. I have one large application with a Windows executable and it will run on macOS Intel via WINE and on macOS Apple Silicon via WINE and Rosetta 2. Startup uses 300% of the M1 and it takes a fair amount of CPU (under one core) while running. The program runs with ease on my Windows i7 desktop though. Two translations does have a performance and RAM cost.

It's running Big Sur and Big Sur seems to use up a lot of RAM. I bought a 2014 iMac 27 (i7, 16 GB, 500 SSD, 4 GB GPU) for $500 and an iMac 2010 (i7, 8 GB, 1 TB HDD) for $100 in the past month and I like the combination of these two systems better than the mini. I added 16 GB of RAM to both systems ($94 each) and they handle whatever I throw at them. Some things the M1 runs faster but I never swap on the iMacs and responsiveness, while not neck-snapping like the M1 is fine for getting things done.

I am in the process of moving stuff off the M1 mini and then plan to sell it.

I really wanted a model with 32 GB of RAM and the ability to support 3 4k monitors but it was a chance to try out Apple Silicon. I have the 2021 MacBook Pro 16 which I love - the early M1 models were just a stopgap. I suspect many are in the same place looking for more options for the mini and iMac.

The used iMacs were great deals as the 2014 comes with a 5k display which I love. I can see how it's hard to go back after going 5k. But with the iMac, I get two displays, two sets of speakers, videocams, microphones and I don't have cables all over my desk. I would take a 2020 iMac i7 over an M1 iMac - just better performance all around and the ability to add aftermarket (cheap) RAM.

Why in hell would you use an 8 year old and 11 year old Mac when you have a 2021 MacBook Pro 16 which would crush those? Also, your use case of "... I have one large application with a Windows executable and it will run on macOS Intel via WINE and on macOS Apple Silicon via WINE and Rosetta 2...." is... an edge case.

If someone really needs to run a Windows app... get a Windows box. Even a midrange Dell will outperform an old Mac running WINE. Kludging together stuff just because you can isn't always the best solution fun as it may be.

Thanks for the explanation! Makes sense that the peak performance from the M1 probably isn't meant to be for a long period of time, considering there's no fan. Good point about the RAM; that's definitely new info to me!

This is probably pedantic of me, but the thermal issue isn't a limitation of the M1. It's a limitation of the Air which is fanless. The Pros, even the 13", have fans and thus can run a higher load for longer.

PS: Final point and then I need to work... If you have programs that you really need to run for your work, you'll want to find Reddit subs or other places where users of those hang out and ask about those programs there because performance is really very software and workflow dependent. For example, MKBHD did a review of the 16" Pro max and it exported his 8k RAW video footage *faster* than his tricked out Mac Pro. Edit performance was also really really good. But if you don't do high end video editing that doesnt mean anything to you.

Look for whether the programs you use are ported to Apple Silicon. Look for M1 reviews from people who do what you do, with the programs you use. Google is your friend here - search for the name of the programs you use and "M1" or "apple Silicon" and "review".

Bottom line - the M1s are very fast and maintain that speed even on battery which can be important for some folks. The 14 and 16 versions are incredible machines and will be speedy as heck for almost anything you need and, yes, faster than the equivalent i9 versions. But you give up the ability to run x86 Windows in a VM or Bootcamp. As I've said in other threads, spec for what you need to do for the next 3 or maybe 4 years and buy for that. What I'd not do, unless you need that ability, is to sink real money into a recent Intel MacBook.

 

[fgengineer]

As others have said, the answer is it depends.

When looking at the MacBook Air, as an ultraportable computer, then I do believe nothing can beat it as a package. The performance, battery, quietness, display quality, trackpad is at the top or near the top. Good luck finding something else with all those top marks in another laptop.

However, for specific usages, it might not be that good. If you want games like you get for PCs, then if will not be good. If you need a lot a ram, again it will not be good. If you need to run a specific windows or X86 app, then if might not be good. If you need multiple external displays, then look elsewhere.

It is best to try it out yourself and see how it works for your workflow.

 

[apparatchik]

This thread is really discussing the M1, not the M1 Pro or M1 Max.

Apple itself has done comparisons of the base M1 GPU to discrete GPUs so it is fair.

My 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros can drive two external 4k monitors, even without a discrete GPU. Something that the Base M1 MacBooks can't do without DisplayLink.

The base M1 Mac Mini can run two 4k monitors out of the box, that's not a limitation of the M1 chip but of the specific IO configuration of the MB's you mention.

When doing these comparisons, price has to be taken into account, as the i9 systems, desktop or otherwise, mentioned in this thread, are significantly more expensive than the M1 systems. With regards to performance per dollar (and perf per watt) Intel is as well significantly behind, while in absolute performance is behind just in specific tasks.

Of course, this year we're expecting M2, as well as an AS Mac Pro. So, we'll see how Alder Lakes stands in a few months time.

 

[pshufd]

Is M1 base really that superior to Intel i9 or i7?​

Very interesting discussion here on performance, future-proofing, market forces, yatta, yatta. But I think the answer to the question is: does it matter? If you wish to stay within the Apple ecosystem on new products, it isn’t going to be on i9/i7 processors. If you make your Apple vs. PC decision based on the processor, then that’s a bit different but nobody here says (so far) they do that. So again, is this question and thread just an academic exercise, because there’s soon to be no real choice in the Apple product line.

Some people don't have a choice because they have to run Windows or Linux under x86.

And you missed PowerPC.

 

[pshufd]

Why in hell would you use an 8 year old and 11 year old Mac when you have a 2021 MacBook Pro 16 which would crush those? Also, your use case of "... I have one large application with a Windows executable and it will run on macOS Intel via WINE and on macOS Apple Silicon via WINE and Rosetta 2...." is... an edge case.

If someone really needs to run a Windows app... get a Windows box. Even a midrange Dell will outperform an old Mac running WINE. Kludging together stuff just because you can isn't always the best solution fun as it may be.

This is probably pedantic of me, but the thermal issue isn't a limitation of the M1. It's a limitation of the Air which is fanless. The Pros, even the 13", have fans and thus can run a higher load for longer.

PS: Final point and then I need to work... If you have programs that you really need to run for your work, you'll want to find Reddit subs or other places where users of those hang out and ask about those programs there because performance is really very software and workflow dependent. For example, MKBHD did a review of the 16" Pro max and it exported his 8k RAW video footage *faster* than his tricked out Mac Pro. Edit performance was also really really good. But if you don't do high end video editing that doesnt mean anything to you.

Look for whether the programs you use are ported to Apple Silicon. Look for M1 reviews from people who do what you do, with the programs you use. Google is your friend here - search for the name of the programs you use and "M1" or "apple Silicon" and "review".

Bottom line - the M1s are very fast and maintain that speed even on battery which can be important for some folks. The 14 and 16 versions are incredible machines and will be speedy as heck for almost anything you need and, yes, faster than the equivalent i9 versions. But you give up the ability to run x86 Windows in a VM or Bootcamp. As I've said in other threads, spec for what you need to do for the next 3 or maybe 4 years and buy for that. What I'd not do, unless you need that ability, is to sink real money into a recent Intel MacBook.

I have a desktop setup and a laptop setup. I work in two places and don't like to carry the laptop back and forth. The laptop only powers two monitors anyways and I have the problem with memory leaks. It runs a lot better not being attached to a couple of monitors. I'm sure that Apple will eventually fix the memory leak problems but I got annoyed and just partitioned my setup.

My 2021 MacBook Pro 16 doesn't crush the 2014 iMac. My iMac is much better at displaying 5k than the 2021 MacBook Pro. Both iMacs are better at running Windows software too.

I didn't bring up the thermal issues of the Air. I don't use an Air.

The program is Active Trader Pro by Fidelity Investments. It's a pro trading platform. There are users on the r/Fidelity forum complaining about it on Macs all the time. The've been complaining about it for over a decade. I really don't think that Fidelity is going to do anything about it. It is a powerful and complex trading tool written on a platform from the 1990s. They got it to run on macOS using WINE. On Apple Silicon, it goes through Rosetta 2, so two translation layers. No wonder it's slow and uses a lot of resources.

Similar issue with Think or Swim, another pro trading platform from TD Ameritrade. It's a Java application. If you install it on macOS, it installs the Intel implementation. So you have Java interpretation running through Rosetta 2, so, again, two layers of translation and you have people in the Ameritrade Reddit forum complaining about performance. I usually just give them my workaround to run natively. It's a really messy workaround and there are people that don't attempt it but it runs ToS natively. This has been an issue since Apple Silicon came out and customers are screaming at the companies to fix it. But they don't care. If you to run their software well, get an Intel system.

And Rosetta 2 will go away too.

 

[pshufd]

The base M1 Mac Mini can run two 4k monitors out of the box, that's not a limitation of the M1 chip but of the specific IO configuration of the MB's you mention.

When doing these comparisons, price has to be taken into account, as the i9 systems, desktop or otherwise, mentioned in this thread, are significantly more expensive than the M1 systems. With regards to performance per dollar (and perf per watt) Intel is as well significantly behind, while in absolute performance is behind just in specific tasks.

Of course, this year we're expecting M2, as well as an AS Mac Pro. So, we'll see how Alder Lakes stands in a few months time.

My 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros can run 2 4k monitors, and the internal screen. I've even tested it with 3 external monitors and the internal screen and it works. That's a case of underpromise and over-deliver by Apple - they state up to 2x4k but you can go even further. I have an M1 mini and it only does two monitors. But I was talking about MacBooks - pretty sure that I stated that explicitly.

 

[clevins]

Some people don't have a choice because they have to run Windows or Linux under x86.

And you missed PowerPC.

In which case the relative performance does not matter. But that's the topic about which OP posted, not the ability to run Windows apps. If someone needs to do that they can do it on their Intel Mac for a while longer but at some point they'll be choosing to stay with obsolete hardware just for that reason. If Windows apps are that critical to someone but they do most of their work in macOS, they should get a separate windows box (and/or evaluate how much they really need the Windows apps).

This entire discussion just illustrates that comparing on a single, narrow criterion doesnt really help anyone make an informed decision about real world purchases. Yes, the M1 is faster than the i9 and i7 in a laptop. Are there caveats to that? Yes. Is there more to the decision on what to buy for any specific user? Also yes.

 

[clevins]

I have a desktop setup and a laptop setup. I work in two places and don't like to carry the laptop back and forth. The laptop only powers two monitors anyways and I have the problem with memory leaks. It runs a lot better not being attached to a couple of monitors. I'm sure that Apple will eventually fix the memory leak problems but I got annoyed and just partitioned my setup.

My 2021 MacBook Pro 16 doesn't crush the 2014 iMac. My iMac is much better at displaying 5k than the 2021 MacBook Pro. Both iMacs are better at running Windows software too.

Oh come on. The idea that the Pro doesnt crush the iMac in performance terms is... not credible. Neither, frankly is the display issue (though the iMac has a better screen that you can get externally for the Pro.

On windows - of course. That's an obvious limitation of the M1.

I didn't bring up the thermal issues of the Air. I don't use an Air.

The program is Active Trader Pro by Fidelity Investments. It's a pro trading platform. There are users on the r/Fidelity forum complaining about it on Macs all the time. The've been complaining about it for over a decade. I really don't think that Fidelity is going to do anything about it. It is a powerful and complex trading tool written on a platform from the 1990s. They got it to run on macOS using WINE. On Apple Silicon, it goes through Rosetta 2, so two translation layers. No wonder it's slow and uses a lot of resources.

And instead of jumping through weird hoops, you can just BUY A PC. If this is a pro trading platform presumably it's used to make money and do so at a high level. That should mean that the ROI from buying a PC and running Windows on it is easy to justify.

Similar issue with Think or Swim, another pro trading platform from TD Ameritrade. It's a Java application. If you install it on macOS, it installs the Intel implementation. So you have Java interpretation running through Rosetta 2, so, again, two layers of translation and you have people in the Ameritrade Reddit forum complaining about performance. I usually just give them my workaround to run natively. It's a really messy workaround and there are people that don't attempt it but it runs ToS natively. This has been an issue since Apple Silicon came out and customers are screaming at the companies to fix it. But they don't care. If you to run their software well, get an Intel system.

And Rosetta 2 will go away too.

Same here. The companies are right - get a PC, run actual Windows.

 

[pshufd]

Oh come on. The idea that the Pro doesnt crush the iMac in performance terms is... not credible. Neither, frankly is the display issue (though the iMac has a better screen that you can get externally for the Pro.

On windows - of course. That's an obvious limitation of the M1.

And instead of jumping through weird hoops, you can just BUY A PC. If this is a pro trading platform presumably it's used to make money and do so at a high level. That should mean that the ROI from buying a PC and running Windows on it is easy to justify.

Same here. The companies are right - get a PC, run actual Windows.

If you want a better iMac on pure performance, compare it with the iMac Pro.

I have PCs. But I prefer Macs. But there are limitations on software.

That's why I have a desktop cluster. Currently a custom Windows build, M1 mini, 2014 iMac and 2010 iMac. I don't actually need the mini though.

You talked about software assuming that I wasn't already an expert on it. And now you're changing the subject. There are restrictions. There are issues with Apple Silicon. There is software that won't be ported.