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

dugbug

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Aug 23, 2008
1,929
2,147
Somewhere in Florida
A lot of us count on this review each year and this one does not disappoint. This thing creeps up to desktop chip levels. No details on the GPU other than basic benchmarks... beats 4070. One criticism on the review is that there is no disclaimer that the PC laptops were on battery or plugged in (or at least there were no separate graphs).

 

altaic

Suspended
Jan 26, 2004
712
484
A lot of us count on this review each year and this one does not disappoint. This thing creeps up to desktop chip levels. No details on the GPU other than basic benchmarks... beats 4070. One criticism on the review is that there is no disclaimer that the PC laptops were on battery or plugged in (or at least there were no separate graphs).

I guess they updated it: “All tests on both PCs and Macs were run with the machines plugged into the wall.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: dugbug

Spanky Deluxe

macrumors demi-god
Mar 17, 2005
5,285
1,789
London, UK
I guess they updated it: “All tests on both PCs and Macs were run with the machines plugged into the wall.”
I'd like more tests on unplugged performance as one video review I watched mentioned that CPU tasks were the same unplugged but GPU tasks were much slower, about a third in performance. That would really kind of suck as I'd like to be able to occasionally play the odd game while chilling on the sofa, watching my kids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dugbug

TechnoMonk

macrumors 68030
Oct 15, 2022
2,606
4,118
I am upgrading; 60-80% performance increase in multi-core data crunching is an amazing upgrade.
It would be great if you can do a comparison. I don’t usually upgrade for 5 years but 128 GB RAM and GPU can make me consider. Outside of 4090 GPU, the M3 Max MBP 16 will probably crush my AMD 39XX threaddripper workstation.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.