Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

applefan19

macrumors regular
Original poster
Sep 26, 2019
158
44
Ordered the 2020, 13” MacBook Pro M1 with upgraded SSD (1 TB) and RAM (16 GB). Price is about the same for a comparable 2020, 13” Intel MacBook Pro. Concerned I should’ve gone with Intel vs M1 since reviews tend to say the M1s are lower end or entry level devices somehow? Thoughts on M1 vs Intel? Most concerned about processor. Coming from a 2012 MacBook Pro. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OllieChristopher
Depends on your use case, but either is a big step up from a 2012. M1 has a lot of advantages so the only reason I can think of an M1 being "entry-level" is because we're supposed to be seeing new stuff soon, which may or may not have any "M2"s. And the only reason I can think of to stick to Intel is if you run a non-ARM OS on it, like Windows, or some old Mac software that hasn't been updated for Apple CPUs for whatever reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: applefan19
The M1 was introduced into the entry level machines, but do not confuse that with low end.

Apple's strategy was to avoid coming in with a completely new, in-house designed chip in their top end, pro-market machines. By introducing it in their entry level machines, if it fell short in any way then they had a safe and reasonable explanation. In reality, they exceeded even their own hopes and came in with something that amazed everyone.

The next machines to come out with new M chips (M1X, or M2 or whatever) will be better than these first ones of course, but that doesn't mean these are in any way a compromise.

As said above, unless you need a specific piece of non-AMR software on it, just be happy with your choice. Think of it as getting a bargain machine (in cost vs performance terms) compared to the previous generation. Apple over delivered, be happy that you get the benefit of it.

EDIT : Oh, and if you'd bought an Intel machine in September last year, I'd guarantee you'd be wishing you would have waited for a M1 ! :)
 
M1 er entry level for now, because they are limited on ports and ram, not performance. So Apple's line up is a bit weird currently, because entry level models are the most powerfull performance wise, till the higher models get updated with even beefier Apple Silicon.
 
Ordered the 2020, 13” MacBook Pro M1 with upgraded SSD (1 TB) and RAM (16 GB). Price is about the same for a comparable 2020, 13” Intel MacBook Pro. Concerned I should’ve gone with Intel vs M1 since reviews tend to say the M1s are lower end or entry level devices somehow? Thoughts on M1 vs Intel? Most concerned about processor. Coming from a 2012 MacBook Pro. Thanks.

When you hear "lower end", the M1 is a low-end Mercedes and the Intel ones are mid-range Kias :)

Apple plans to upgrade _all_ Macs over the next two years. The first chip is the current M1, which is indeed a low-end ARM processor, compared to the future ones. Speed wise it is somewhere between 6 and 8 Intel cores, so you see low end M1 is at least the same as a midrange Intel processor. As a low-end processor, you are limited to 16 GB of RAM, so if that isn't enough that's a problem. It has a very very fast SSD drive, so where on your 2012 MBP you would have a significant slowdown if you don't have enough RAM, the effect will be much less on the M1. The other limitation for a low-end chip is the number of screens that you can attach. Check it out. Either it's enough for you and not a problem at all, or it's a deal breaker. You can attach a 6K monitor to any M1 processor. SSD is unlimited, you can get 2TB if you need it.

The next machines to come out with new M chips (M1X, or M2 or whatever) will be better than these first ones ...
We should really have some bets what the next M chip will be called. I _personally_ think it will be called M1 and you'll have to check if you want M1 with 4+4 or 8+4 or 12+4 cores. And next year, when the chips all get 15-25% faster, those will be called M2, and M3 the year after that and so on.
 
We should really have some bets what the next M chip will be called. I _personally_ think it will be called M1 and you'll have to check if you want M1 with 4+4 or 8+4 or 12+4 cores. And next year, when the chips all get 15-25% faster, those will be called M2, and M3 the year after that and so on.

Hmmm.....good idea

Depends on where Apple go next

If they go for mid-range devices I'll go for M1X. Better marketing opportunities with the 'new M1X' vs 'M1 with more cores'

If they go for top-end devices, then maybe the M2 would suit better
 
  • Like
Reactions: applefan19
I have a 2012 MBP 9,2. Good machine. My 2020 i5/8/512 Air and my M1/8/512 both wipe the floor with it. The 2020 Pro can have 4 TB while the M1 has only 2. If all your interested in is raw power, the M1 is the obvious choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mac... nificent
Ordered the 2020, 13” MacBook Pro M1 with upgraded SSD (1 TB) and RAM (16 GB). Price is about the same for a comparable 2020, 13” Intel MacBook Pro. Concerned I should’ve gone with Intel vs M1 since reviews tend to say the M1s are lower end or entry level devices somehow? Thoughts on M1 vs Intel? Most concerned about processor. Coming from a 2012 MacBook Pro. Thanks.
I'm on my 3rd and final purchase of my new MacBook Pro and decided to stick with the M1. I originally purchased a MacBook Pro M1 and upgraded the RAM to 16GB and with a 500GB SSD but after a week of use I determined 500GB is too little of space. With Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop Elements installed, I realized I really don't have room for any other apps. So I returned it.

I then ordered another MacBook Pro with 16GB and a 1TB SSD but with the Intel CPU. After a week with that one, I realized the battery life was TERRIBLE, and heated up with normal use just like my old Macbook Pro mid-2012 model! I read one of the forums on here where many others experienced the same, lousy battery life where my Mac only lasted 5-6 hours with normal use. I decided I didn't want to have it plugged into power everytime I used it. I did remember that the M1 I originally ordered had excellent battery life so I returned my Intel Macbook.

I am now on the MacBook that makes the most sense which is the same as your's , Applefan19.
 
I'm on my 3rd and final purchase of my new MacBook Pro and decided to stick with the M1. I originally purchased a MacBook Pro M1 and upgraded the RAM to 16GB and with a 500GB SSD but after a week of use I determined 500GB is too little of space. With Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop Elements installed, I realized I really don't have room for any other apps. So I returned it.

I then ordered another MacBook Pro with 16GB and a 1TB SSD but with the Intel CPU. After a week with that one, I realized the battery life was TERRIBLE, and heated up with normal use just like my old Macbook Pro mid-2012 model! I read one of the forums on here where many others experienced the same, lousy battery life where my Mac only lasted 5-6 hours with normal use. I decided I didn't want to have it plugged into power everytime I used it. I did remember that the M1 I originally ordered had excellent battery life so I returned my Intel Macbook.

I am now on the MacBook that makes the most sense which is the same as your's , Applefan19.
That's good information, thanks...
 
Apple has pulled this kind of propaganda before during the PPC era - mhz myth.. and now it is saying the M1 is the best since sliced bread - I think there is fallacy to this. I don't trust anything that comes out of cook or Federighe's mouth. Can't stand the later one. When Steve died, apple died with him. Don't get me wrong, i THINK M1 is a great move just as it was from 68k to PowerPC.. I don't know, I guess i am a RISC guy who loves all RISC because CISC SUCKS.
 
The M1 was introduced into the entry level machines, but do not confuse that with low end.

Apple's strategy was to avoid coming in with a completely new, in-house designed chip in their top end, pro-market machines. By introducing it in their entry level machines, if it fell short in any way then they had a safe and reasonable explanation. In reality, they exceeded even their own hopes and came in with something that amazed everyone.

The next machines to come out with new M chips (M1X, or M2 or whatever) will be better than these first ones of course, but that doesn't mean these are in any way a compromise.

As said above, unless you need a specific piece of non-AMR software on it, just be happy with your choice. Think of it as getting a bargain machine (in cost vs performance terms) compared to the previous generation. Apple over delivered, be happy that you get the benefit of it.

EDIT : Oh, and if you'd bought an Intel machine in September last year, I'd guarantee you'd be wishing you would have waited for a M1 ! :)
Hi,
Would like to hear your take on my question -
I just got a M1 8gb memory but when it reads external drives loading, searching, identifying folder size with many files it seems slow to the point of Finder not releasing one of my external drives.

side mention, needs: I would like to attach a larger screen, and I would like to read files I have on jump-drives when on the go, so I will require a hub at home as well as a usbc 3 port.

Is the file process issue an example of the processor or the memory? Would Intel (with 16gb) work better on processing large files? Or should I request and wait for the "custom built" M1 16gb?
Thanks so much!
 
Hi,
Would like to hear your take on my question -
I just got a M1 8gb memory but when it reads external drives loading, searching, identifying folder size with many files it seems slow to the point of Finder not releasing one of my external drives.

side mention, needs: I would like to attach a larger screen, and I would like to read files I have on jump-drives when on the go, so I will require a hub at home as well as a usbc 3 port.

Is the file process issue an example of the processor or the memory? Would Intel (with 16gb) work better on processing large files? Or should I request and wait for the "custom built" M1 16gb?
Thanks so much!
This may also be issue with external drives and how Finder and Spotlight accesses them. And their format...
Apple SSDs are amazingly fast, even in M1 (relatively cheap) machines. We are spoiled by their speed. External drives - HD or even jump drives - may be 10-30x slower. MacOS may try to index them - create Spotlight index to speed up operations - on at some of these drives and that can slow down access to them for long time.
My MBP with 16GB RAM reads external drives quite slowly. Some of my older (even USB3) sticks are so slow now that they are beyond what I am willing to accept so I throw them out. And many small files are making it worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StephSco
Intel and AMD will catch up to APPLE ARM chips and surpass them in pure power.
APPLE is already down to the 5nm
AMD is at 7nm and these chips are already more powerful than anything APPLE offers now. They got another 2nm of downsizing to play with


Intel is at 10nm process with their 11th Gen i9 processors which already are proven to beat the Apple M1 chip in many real world tasks. And they still have 5nm of downsizing to play around with.
 
AMD is at 7nm and these chips are already more powerful than anything APPLE offers now. They got another 2nm of downsizing to play with
...and both Intel and AMD are lumbered by the need to support the complex x86 instruction set, which means a chunk of the die wasted on the x86 instruction decoder, space that ARM chips can put to better use... and they‘re also stuck producing a huge range of chips for an entire industry, whereas Apple can produce a few tailored chips designed specifically for Macs and iDevices.
Intel is at 10nm process with their 11th Gen i9 processors which already are proven to beat the Apple M1 chip in many real world tasks.
The M1 is an ultra-low power chip for tablets, ultraportables and small-form-factor desktops. comparing it with an i9 is ridiculous. An M1 has 10W-15W TDP, 4 performance cores and 4 low-power cores. An i9 has 35-65 W TDP and 8 full-speed cores. Even the “low power” i9 uses twice as much power as an M1.

We’ll have to wait and see how the M1X does against the i9 - but if, as predicted, it has twice the CPU and GPU cores of the M1 then on some multithreaded tasks - likely the same carefully-picked ”many real-world tasks” on which the i9 beats the M1 - it is going to be getting on for twice as fast as the M1.
 
This may also be issue with external drives and how Finder and Spotlight accesses them. And their format...
Apple SSDs are amazingly fast, even in M1 (relatively cheap) machines. We are spoiled by their speed. External drives - HD or even jump drives - may be 10-30x slower. MacOS may try to index them - create Spotlight index to speed up operations - on at some of these drives and that can slow down access to them for long time.
My MBP with 16GB RAM reads external drives quite slowly. Some of my older (even USB3) sticks are so slow now that they are beyond what I am willing to accept so I throw them out. And many small files are making it worse.
Thank you for your response! I will definitely toss those older sticks. I thinking I will return this M1 8gb memory for an available Intel with 16GB or request the M1 with 16GB.

So you don't think memory will amend the external drive problem?

Is there something other than "Spotlight" to index? I get errors copying my "Library" (57gb) from external drive and it won't release the drive. Errors note space when copying to another external (76gb free), but that shouldn't a straight arrow issue. Or errors reading all the files when copying to the new MBP M1.

Errors are code 36 relating to permissions - so I was going to try terminal instead, but if still does indexing...?
Thanks again!
Happy Friday & weekend
 
Apple has pulled this kind of propaganda before during the PPC era - mhz myth.. and now it is saying the M1 is the best since sliced bread.
I had a the last generation Intel i5 Air and replaced it with the 2020 M1 Air (pretty much exactly the same machine but with the Apple Silicon processor), both with 8 GB of RAM. The difference was night and day. The i5 would heat up and slow down pretty frequently and consume so much power that I could barely get 5-6 hours of it if I was lucky. The M1 never gets hot and I've rarely if ever managed to make it slow down much no matter what I'm doing. And it does so using much, much less power, to the point where I can easily get 12 hours or more out of a full battery.

So, this is a direct comparison with near-identical hardware and software and... I believe the hype ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Neill
I had a the last generation Intel i5 Air and replaced it with the 2020 M1 Air (pretty much exactly the same machine but with the Apple Silicon processor), both with 8 GB of RAM. The difference was night and day. The i5 would heat up and slow down pretty frequently and consume so much power that I could barely get 5-6 hours of it if I was lucky. The M1 never gets hot and I've rarely if ever managed to make it slow down much no matter what I'm doing. And it does so using much, much less power, to the point where I can easily get 12 hours or more out of a full battery.

So, this is a direct comparison with near-identical hardware and software and... I believe the hype ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I have the same 2 machines. The thermal pad mod helps my i5 alot. The battery life on the M1 is like 5 times as good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ignatius345
M1 er entry level for now, because they are limited on ports and ram, not performance. So Apple's line up is a bit weird currently, because entry level models are the most powerfull performance wise, till the higher models get updated with even beefier Apple Silicon.
Of course we will have to wait for the next offerings, but I believe you are correct. "Not in performance".

It makes sense that the next performance of the M1 will be a M1x or some "slightly" more performance and slowly increase power for more $ revenue over time. Entry level in ports and RAM, but not power. I don't think the next will be a "jump" in power, but you never know with Apple. It depends on how far a jump they want right now compared to what is offered in the markets. The M1 probably exceeded their expectations. Can they put out next a strong M2 or more currently...probably...but thinking $...better to inch (or mm) your way up to spoon feed all of the power junkies. :)

We will see..
 
I agree with post above. Even if they have the power currently available, they will release only some portion, so they have something for next year too, to milk again customers. Thats a bussiness.
 
It makes sense that the next performance of the M1 will be a M1x or some "slightly" more performance and slowly increase power for more $ revenue over time.
If the “M1X”, as rumoured, has something like double the number of CPU and GPU cores then it should be significantly faster on some workloads, particularly video, audio, image processing apps that are optimised for multi-threading & GPU-based comouting... at the expense of more power consumption & needing a larger laptop, or desktop, housing. C.f. the also-rumoured “M2” which will have new core designs and maybe a tweaked production process but will likely start out as a low-power configuration for MacBook Airs and iPads. The M1X is likely to be considerably faster than the M2 for many multithreaded “pro” applications. In time, there may be a “M2X” with more cores.

More I/O, more RAM, more display support will likely also be needed with the -X processors, of course, but while an M1 extended with 32-64GB RAM and support for 3-4 displays could potentially match current Intel MBPs and iMacs, it wouldn’t be much of an upgrade.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.