With how well the M1 is performing, are Intel Macs just DOA at this point?

[medee88]

I just spent $4k in September, on a 16" MBP, i9 with 32GB and 5600m and I'm concerned that this device will just tank in value when the M1 or M2 take fully over. I'm debating if I should ask Apple to return or sell this machine before they become obsolete. I thought it was good idea to max out the last intel MBP given that it might retain it's value since it can run Bootcamp etc... but I just feel like maybe I overspent on a machine that will easily be decimated in stats by a cheaper computer in a years time.

Also, yes, I know I can use this computer and it'll be a great machine and I'm not that worried about the value, but I am wondering if maybe I should wait and pick up the M1 / M2 16" when it comes out and will decimate this machine.

Just wondering if people think the Intel Mac's wont have a market later on.

Oh they'll still have a market. Apple has even stated the transition will take "About 2 years", and Apple doesn't deprecate their products for quite some time. Here's where I think people will likely prefer the intel variants for quite a while:

1. Virtualization - Apple has added a new hypervisor, but there are thoughts some OS's won't fully ever work with it. Developers who need access to these other OS's will be in the market for quite some time.
2. Boot Camp - Same story here. From people who want to play games to develop intense windows workloads, this will likely remain the computer of choice.
3. Rosetta 2 isn't perfect. I've already ran up with a few (largely older/open source apps) that work abnormally on Apple Silicon and make them pretty unusable. I have a feeling there will remain a need for 100% working apps, esp business ones that won't get updates for a while.
4. External GPUs. Maybe support will come one day, but for now they don't work

As a data point - Look at when the Intel Macs came around. The PowerPC Macs still retained their value for a looong time.

As someone who has a M1 MacBook Air (16gb) and thinking of selling my 16" (I got a 32gb 16" similar to you), I'd say if you have the means, I'd give it a try to see if it can work for your workflow. I enjoy the smaller computer and battery life more than the perks of the 16". Giving up Parallels for Windows support was a little hard, but I'm at the point where I'd prefer to remote in to a computer then tank my battery life and use up resources.

 

[Dragon M.]

Let's see one of you guys push an XDR in bootcamp running SolidWorks or ANSYS with an M1. Not happening.

These recent chips have their place. They are able to read video codecs well, and they can run office apps. Aside from that, it is just a bunch of Apple fan boys on here justifying their purchase. However I find it humorous it requires one to now render their intel useless.

If that isn't the most prime example of toxic consumerism then I don't know what is.

That's sort of a ridiculous statement. Look at the laptops the M1 chip models replaced. Who would have wanted to run any more than a few thousand DOFs on those? Anything more than a toy problem doesn't get run on my Intel i9 MBP, it gets sent to the Linux clusters or workstations.

It's not toxic consumerism. The M1 chip does exactly what it was designed for very well, and people are raving about exactly that. It seems like you're picking an esoteric and almost irrelevant reason the M1 chip doesn't suit your needs and calling it "humorous" that other people have overlooked it. Yeah, the M1 chip isn't going to run my multi-million element simulation, but neither will ANY Apple laptop.

And the most important thing you're not taking into account is none of us have seen what the next generation of AS chips are.

What exactly is performance my friend? Does it have a unit? Can it be derived?

A watt is a watt, and it generates the same amount of energy which is the same amount of heat no matter how to produce that watt of power.

What..? Yeah, a watt is a watt. But there is such thing as efficiency. Generating more heat while doing less useful work doesn't indicate a "superior" chip.

Anything engineering related will remain intel.

Engineering is much much much more than CAD and FEM. For instance, data science and machine learning are a huge area in engineering, and I can see how these new SOCs could be great for this community. There's even some work by engineers and scientists to reduce the computation burden of large and complex FEM models by using machine learning.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I just spent $4k in September, on a 16" MBP, i9 with 32GB and 5600m and I'm concerned that this device will just tank in value when the M1 or M2 take fully over. I'm debating if I should ask Apple to return or sell this machine before they become obsolete. I thought it was good idea to max out the last intel MBP given that it might retain it's value since it can run Bootcamp etc... but I just feel like maybe I overspent on a machine that will easily be decimated in stats by a cheaper computer in a years time.

Also, yes, I know I can use this computer and it'll be a great machine and I'm not that worried about the value, but I am wondering if maybe I should wait and pick up the M1 / M2 16" when it comes out and will decimate this machine.

Just wondering if people think the Intel Mac's wont have a market later on.

Stats aren't everything. Frankly, with how many apps that struggled to move from 32-bit Intel to 64-bit Intel and may not even make the move from 64-bit Intel to either 64-bit ARM or a Universal Binary ("2") with both, I would say that an i9 16" MacBook Pro isn't anything to feel bummed about. Hell, I'd be overjoyed to have such a machine for many years to come. Furthermore, virtualizing x86 OSes (of which there are more of and will continue for a while longer to be more of) offers flexibility you absolutely don't have on an Apple Silicon Mac (and probably won't for some time).

I think the market for Intel Macs will diminish just as the market for any computer diminishes. We're not going to be clamoring for them in 8 years like we were a few months ago. But that's the same for each computer, regardless of architecture and performance.

I would only worry about the performance of an Apple Silicon 16" MacBook Pro decimating that of your Intel 16" MacBook Pro if you found your Intel 16" MacBook Pro's performance to be lacking. Otherwise, it's a dick measuring contest you're playing with yourself, Apple, and your wallet (and spoiler alert: you're never going to win).

 

[E.Lizardo]

"better product" is subject

So you just joined Friday to Lecture people about how incorrect their "SUBJECTIVE" opinion is wrong?

 

[gpat]

I've made my transition, replacing my 2019 MBP 16" (base model) with a MacBook Air (base model).
I've been the first to mock this transition, being strongly skeptical and seeing it as a mere cashgrab by Apple - but I've been wrong.

Buying Apple Silicon now is like buying an Intel Mac in 2006 - let me explain.
Sure, the transition is still underway. Sure, next year M2 Macs are going to be much improved over M1 Macs.
But the new tech still makes the old one DOA. 2019 Intel Macs in 2020 are just as DOA as 2005 PPC Macs in 2006.

I've been among the ones thinking that Apple stopped making good laptops in 2016. My latest good experience has been with a 2013 Macbook Air. The 2017 12" Retina has been a disaster for me, between the butterfly keyboard and absymal performance - and also the 2019 MBP 16" has been decent for me, but nothing more.

I've been hating the Touch Bar since day one - disabling it in order to touch type without the damn thing getting in between - and also being disappointed in the bad power management. The dedicated Radeon GPU has been kicking in for something as trivial as web browsing or connecting to a TeamViewer remote desktop - which is comical if you know what I'm talking about.

Between my experience and the rest of the lineup, like the 2019 Air with terrible thermals, and the 13" 2019 Pro just being (IMHO) overpriced for what it does, I've just drawn my conclusion that Apple stopped caring for good optimization on those machines.

They've been putting more effort in their iOS devices, which, right or wrong, makes the new M1 Macs a massive improvement over the Intel Macs, because they allow you to benefit from their mobile device know-how in a bigger and more powerful package.

Also amazing good value if you compare the MBA price to their iPad lineup - but I won't go off-topic here.

My MBA experience is amazing, I wouldn't even have dreamed about something like this just 1 month ago.
I'd only like a bigger screen, the 13" is a lot smaller than I remembered from my old days, and the 16" just spoiled me in that regard.

But I'll stick with this machine if Apple doesn't make a 16" MBP without touch bar. Ditching the touch bar still is my #1 reason for changing my computer.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

expecting from workmachine that it will stay cold like 30C is foolish. The new Silicon chips may be faster, so ppls will put more load to them and more demanding aps... and then guess what will happen, the chip will start to generate heat as well...

M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

The M1 is up *here*, running fast and cool, and all the competing chips from Intel, AMD, Qualcomm, Samsung, and whoever else are down *there*, running hot or running slow, looking around for their recently stolen pants.

daringfireball.net

 

[philstubbington]

There is nothing unhealthy about it, we have Intel CPU’s in recent years which go well beyond the TDP that these chassis can handle in a reasonable manner. M1 is reversing that trend. It’s all about performance per watt, and Intel screwed that up. Laptops shouldn’t get so hot that they become uncomfortable to hold or sound like a jet engine - I think that is a reasonable benchmark to work against, nothing unhealthy.

Good in cold weather though, to heat up you lap

What intrigues me with the M1 is what are the architectural trade-offs? There's always a trade-off, as there is with software architectures (I used to manage a team of architects who I put through this program, so I know a little about it - https://resources.sei.cmu.edu/library/asset-view.cfm?assetid=5177).

If you think of trade-offs being mostly constraints (e.g. words that end in "ity") then if it's greater velocity (aka speed) what are we getting less of? Upgradability and maintainability seem like options. Anything else that as a user I would care about?

 

[richinaus]

I will sell off my 16” when a the 14” & 16” M1 pro’s arrive [more likely go for the 14]. At that point I will also buy an Intel NUC and hook it put to my egpu for any windows work.

Suffice to say my 16” has already paid for itself [business use] so I dont really care what I sell it for in 6 - 12 months time.

 

[AnthonyHarris]

An M1 MacBook would be DOA for me because the software I run for my design work isn't currently supported/doesn't work correctly. (And I want a 16 inch screen, more ports, better speakers, better mic...)

They're going to be a great thing for everyone in the future no doubt, but for right now I will let the test dummies play.

 

[C. Robert]

The new Macs are nice but they are the same chassis as the older ones. Once apple releases newer body Macs and MacBooks, the new M1's and older intel will both be old news. I would hold on to my intel until newer chassis models are released.

 

[Lemon Olive]

My 16" MBP can barely get 2.5 hours off the charger while doing any kind of actual work. It's a piece of junk, quite honestly. They need to update this model asap.

 

[Lemon Olive]

The new Macs are nice but they are the same chassis as the older ones. Once apple releases newer body Macs and MacBooks, the new M1's and older intel will both be old news. I would hold on to my intel until newer chassis models are released.

Chasis? Lol. There is nothing remotely necessary that needs to change about it.

 

[deeddawg]

The new Macs are nice but they are the same chassis as the older ones. Once apple releases newer body Macs and MacBooks, the new M1's and older intel will both be old news. I would hold on to my intel until newer chassis models are released.

Perhaps.

Remember that new chassis in 2016 though? The one with the innovative butterfly keyboard and no physical ESC key? Cr@p that didn't fully get fixed for three years?

Forgive me if I'm a wee bit skeptical about a rumored new chassis... 😈

 

[greenmeanie]

Personally I have the 16GB 1 TB MacBook Pro M1 and can't see why anyone would buy a intel machine anymore.
It is weird getting use to the quietness again from not hearing fans racing all the time.
I would say people that need boot camp still would need the Intel machine but ARM boot camp is looking good for the M1 so soon I see no reason for the Intel machine. And people needing windows should just use windows machines then.
I always laugh at the people saying they hate Windows/Microsoft machines but live in boot camp on the Mac.

 

[leman]

Just wondering if people think the Intel Mac's wont have a market later on.

The thing is, the amount fo people who absolutely need bootcamp or Windows WM support is relatively low... and many of those people are likely to move to a Windows machine rather than looking to buy a used Mac. I have little doubt that the value of Intel Macs will tank massively over the next few years.

expecting from workmachine that it will stay cold like 30C is foolish. The new Silicon chips may be faster, so ppls will put more load to them and more demanding aps... and then guess what will happen, the chip will start to generate heat as well...

You are missing the fact that Apple can deliver that performance while using around four times less power than Intel-based machines. So Apple can easily keep the maximal heat production down while improving performance.

What exactly is performance my friend? Does it have a unit? Can it be derived?

A watt is a watt, and it generates the same amount of energy which is the same amount of heat no matter how to produce that watt of power.

Is this supposed to be a trick question? Performance is the measure of completed work per unit of time. So far, Apple Silicon Macs can do about four times more work per watt. My M1 laptop is faster at compiling code and running statistical simulations than my 16" i9 MBP that was more than two times more expensive. And it can do all those demanding things being completely silent, where my 16" sounds like it's about to take off.

 

[deeddawg]

I would say people that need boot camp still would need the Intel machine but ARM boot camp is looking good for the M1 so soon I see no reason for the Intel machine. And people needing windows should just use windows machines then.
I always laugh at the people saying they hate Windows/Microsoft machines but live in boot camp on the Mac.

Some folks need a particular app that simply doesn't exist on macOS - what's your advice to them?

 

[smbu2000]

Apple Silicon is still quite an unknown at this point. It performs well, but there were issues when Apple transitioned to Intel. Those very early Intel Macs were EOL fairly quickly compared to the later Intel. There may be issues that pop up now that AS is out of the testing phase within Apple and is out to consumers to be tested en masse.

It's best to wait until the next version releases before transitioning over. Plus being limited to 13"(and 2TB on one side) is quite a bummer.

The new models are tempting, but I'm going to stick with my Intel MBPs until they release a newer version 4TB 13/14" or preferably a 15/16" MBP with better performance.

 

[gpat]

Some folks need a particular app that simply doesn't exist on macOS - what's your advice to them?

From my experience, Intel Macs aren't the best hosts for virtualization or Boot Camp anyway.
16" MBPs are restricted to dedicated graphics on Boot Camp, and 13" often ship with SSDs too cramped to effectively run a dual boot setup long term.
With the money you have to spend to upgrade them in an optimal manner, you can well afford a second Windows laptop for those applications or a much beefier Windows desktop to use remotely via RDP.
Running Windows on ARM locally is also gong to be possible in a matter of months. Some legacy apps are going to be left behind, but that's an acceptable tradeoff.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Apple Silicon is still quite an unknown at this point. It performs well, but there were issues when Apple transitioned to Intel. Those very early Intel Macs were EOL fairly quickly compared to the later Intel. There may be issues that pop up now that AS is out of the testing phase within Apple and is out to consumers to be tested en masse.

It's best to wait until the next version releases before transitioning over. Plus being limited to 13"(and 2TB on one side) is quite a bummer.

The new models are tempting, but I'm going to stick with my Intel MBPs until they release a newer version 4TB 13/14" or preferably a 15/16" MBP with better performance.

These macs are perfect for someone like my wife, who needs a mac to browse facebook and design cutouts for her Cricut machine and embroiderer. They may be limited in bandwidth and monitor outputs, but I have doubts that my wife will ever do more than put a USB drive into hers.

I'll probably go all out with a USB to Ethernet adapter. We're the perfect use case for something like the $999 Air.

 

[deeddawg]

From my experience, Intel Macs aren't the best hosts for virtualization or Boot Camp anyway.
16" MBPs are restricted to dedicated graphics on Boot Camp, and 13" often ship with SSDs too cramped to effectively run a dual boot setup long term.
With the money you have to spend to upgrade them in an optimal manner, you can well afford a second Windows laptop for those applications or a much beefier Windows desktop to use remotely via RDP.
Running Windows on ARM locally is also gong to be possible in a matter of months. Some legacy apps are going to be left behind, but that's an acceptable tradeoff.

Sure, except in many cases there's no need for much power or storage.

When I was in grad school there were a couple of small apps I needed to use for a couple months each that didn't run on OSX. With parallels I could run them on my MBP. You'll also sometimes find specific apps for device flashing/updates or vehicle diagnostic interfaces that exist only on Windows. Examples offhand being Yamaha YDS, Directed Directlink, something else I used on Toyota to code new keyfobs) For those you'd need only a small windows partition or even just boot from USB.

To follow greenmeanie's advice the folks needing such things should just use Windows machines.

Seems kinda drastic, don't you think?

 

[Zen_Arcade]

I just looked at Mac Minis. The M1 with 16 GB RAM and 1 TB storage is less expensive and faster than a refurbished Mini with a 3.2 GHz i7, 8 GB RAM, and 1 TB storage.

Based on the available performance measurements, the M1 is a substantially better value for most. Only if you have to use an eGPU (why?), need to be able to run Windows, etc., does an Intel Mini make any sense.

Hence, I think with respect to the less expensive Macs, Intel is indeed DOA. Obviously, if you need expandability or better graphics, that's not the case. But for the Air and Mini, in particular, Intel seems DOA. And, for the matter, the base 13" MBP - which is now faster than the fastest i7 13" MBP.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Personally I have the 16GB 1 TB MacBook Pro M1 and can't see why anyone would buy a intel machine anymore.

Here's why: bigger screen, dedicated and more powerful GPU or more memory they actually need.

The problem is really, many people are buying over-specced machines they don't really need for browsing the web, watching videos or writing emails. For those that do, the M1 machines are not there yet. I expect them to arrive in about one year.

 

[Webster's Mac]

It’s not even just the performance, the heat, noise and battery life is so much better that it’s even worth taking a performance hit in some work flows for these new machines. I’ve owned so many MacBooks recently and the heat and noise is unacceptable (due to how hot the Intel chips get). Same experience on windows laptops.

Yep. And not just that, but these AMD GPUs run hot as hell too. Even after repasting (multiple times with both Arctic MX-4 and Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, some of the best non-liquid metal thermal pastes), my Mid 2015 MBP runs insanely hot and thermal throttles a lot due to the GPU overheating. It's insane. I cannot wait to get my hands on an M1 Mac. I just want smooth, quiet, and fast macs at this point

Edit: My work laptop which is a relatively new Dell Latitude (5401) hits 100C daily. Culprit? The CPU. Intel has sat around too long. Between AMD and Apple's CPUs, they are gonna be force to innovate or go under

 

[gpat]

Sure, except in many cases there's no need for much power or storage.

When I was in grad school there were a couple of small apps I needed to use for a couple months each that didn't run on OSX. With parallels I could run them on my MBP. You'll also sometimes find specific apps for device flashing/updates or vehicle diagnostic interfaces that exist only on Windows. Examples offhand being Yamaha YDS, Directed Directlink, something else I used on Toyota to code new keyfobs) For those you'd need only a small windows partition or even just boot from USB.

To follow greenmeanie's advice the folks needing such things should just use Windows machines.

Seems kinda drastic, don't you think?

Not quite as drastic as you picture it.
I'm familiar with your scenario, I need a legacy x86 app in my workflow myself. I used to run a Windows XP VM in my MBP until last week. Now I just keep it in remote and RDP to it.

If you need compatibility with some niche application with low requirements you can just get an used laptop for $100 and keep it in a corner for those cases, either to be used locally or via remote desktop.

Or you could hope for proper execution on Windows on Arm when it becomes available, but it gets risky for those scenarios.

I understand your problem and I'm not dismissing it, but Apple has always pushed the product forward considering the 95% of applications, at the cost of ditching the remaining 5% altogether.
There are still 68k and PPC machines being used around the world for legitimate workflows, you're lucky if your use is covered by ubiquitous x86 hardware that can be found basically everywhere for cheap.

 

[deeddawg]

I understand your problem and I'm not dismissing it, but Apple has always pushed the product forward considering the 95% of applications, at the cost of ditching the remaining 5% altogether.

I suspect you've misunderstood the point of my response to greenmeanie - please go back to the specific post I replied to and take my response in that context.

Namely - there is a grey area of users who far prefer the macOS environment yet have some need of a Windows app. Those users needs shouldn't be dismissed as "those people should just use windows machines then".

I suspect that in time there will be decently viable emulation for low-impact apps/tasks. For now some folks are in a bit of a grey area and aren't able to switch over. I am fortunately not in that boat - my need for Windows outside the professional context is nil, and my work provides/requires a Windows system.