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.
Devious marketing of M2
- Thread starter MacsAre1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't see much of a problem. So their marketing is "devious" and "crap" but you and I wait for the real reviews and benchmarks before we make our decision to buy. We don't need Apple's numbers. Those who don't see through their marketing are the ones who don't even care. They still get a better and faster Mac than the ones before. So in the end it doesn't matter much. Even Intel and AMD do this kind of "devious" marketing all the time.
Last edited:
I’m pretty sure their marketing is directed at me. I was going to buy the new M2 Mac mini no matter the exact speed. Will it be faster than my 2014 mini? Yes! Ok good enough. About 10X faster you say? Great, who cares about the precise speed increase! I’m not comparing the new Mac mini to an intel machine because I wouldn’t buy a PC. I’m comparing the mini to an almost 10 year old mini.
Yes, many people forget that the main reason to buy a Mac for the majority is the OS no matter what the pc market has to offer. All the pc critics are the ones not using Mac or with no intention to buy one.
First: As someone who works in marketing I can tell you, thats normal behavior. Only show numbers that make you look good.
Second: It makes no sense to compare X86 with ARM. Completely different technologys.
You don’t need marketing or benchmarks to make a good buying decision. Just buy what fulfills your needs. It’s that easy 😉
Second: It makes no sense to compare X86 with ARM. Completely different technologys.
You don’t need marketing or benchmarks to make a good buying decision. Just buy what fulfills your needs. It’s that easy 😉
The "best selling PC" is probably a Dell, HO, or Lenovo running a low end CPU and Intel integrated Graphics. I had a Dell Ultra-Small Form Factor desk top with a 3 GHz Core 2 Duo from 2010 until I left in 2018, and I was in R&D at that.
A quick bounce to Dell's website turns up an Optiplex 7000 micro form factor machine with an i5-12500T at 2.0 GHz and 4.4 Ghz turbo, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD for $929. And it has an external power brick and UHD 770 graphics.
M2 mini seems pretty competitive to me.
You probably didn't get Apple's strategy here. Apple knows it very well that for the time being, they can't compete with x86-x64 with dedicated GPU in terms of raw power. So they focused on making SOC purpose-built for a specific task, Video editing, and photo editing. Apple Silicon SOCs have dedicated media decoding and encoding engines and they are specifically built for it. So Apple SOCs are excellent when it comes to video editing. When it comes to pure graphical power, those SOCs are nowhere near the current Nvidia GPUs. With these SOCs Apple is targeting content creators and average users, rather than gamers and someone who works on Autodesk Maya or Cinema 4D. Apple is following some clever technical as well as a marketing strategy.
As far as I am aware/recall, Apple hasn’t really touted highest performance (i.e., fastest) personal computer since the Power Mac G5:
Regarding “best selling,” I don’t know… However, even with gaming, Steam’s data shows the largest percentage of utilized hardware is far from flagship or even current generation:
In other words, the stuff (e.g., computer configurations) you see/hear on YouTube, forums, and other social media isn’t the norm but rather the desired.
Regarding “best selling,” I don’t know… However, even with gaming, Steam’s data shows the largest percentage of utilized hardware is far from flagship or even current generation:
In other words, the stuff (e.g., computer configurations) you see/hear on YouTube, forums, and other social media isn’t the norm but rather the desired.
I don't really see much competition, if any, in the windows desktop market if I want a great performance in a compact form factor at that price level.
Perhaps the detractors here could start the ball rolling by suggesting an alternative to the Mac Mini?
Perhaps the detractors here could start the ball rolling by suggesting an alternative to the Mac Mini?
Not quite. They focus on mobile, where they absolutely can deliver very competitive performance in both the CPU and the GPU (e.g. 14TFLOPS GPU at sub 50W - Nvidia can only dream about that). What Apple doesn’t have is hardware capable to compete with high-end desktop.
Wrong! Apple chooses to not compete on raw power, because only losers do. Smart power wins the game.
What exactly was the point of this thread again?
Anyone who is comparing specs one for one like this knows enough to look past marketing talking points and find the "nerdy" data about what does what and how fast. The only evidence you've given that Apple's doing something tricky here is some Windows Central article defending PCs? Come on.
Anyone who is comparing specs one for one like this knows enough to look past marketing talking points and find the "nerdy" data about what does what and how fast. The only evidence you've given that Apple's doing something tricky here is some Windows Central article defending PCs? Come on.
Yes, but Apple is losing that edge. In the past, it used to be the best platform for content creation and video editing.
But they are neglecting their own operating system and content creation tools.
Add it to the bill that AMD is getting more efficient.
Apple Silicon effortlessly wins almost every photo and video editing benchmark. What are you basing all this on?
Only a testament to the skills of their marketing department and the gullibility of the general audience. Their tricks with TDP alone are impressive enough. Sure thing, AMD is more efficient than Intel, there is no doubt about that. But Zen4 at 5nm still needs 2-3x as much power to deliver the same performance as two year old A14/M1.
Anxiety about Apple eating Intel's lunch and inspiring people to move to Mac.
Define "effortlessly".
Definitely not on raw power anymore, because you can easily use a high end GPU to win any benchmarks you want (and even combine as many as you want) on the PC side.
Which leads me to my next point:
I particularly like the GPD Win 4 as a portable solution. It has the Ryzen 6800U processor, which this benchmark suggests it's 25% slower than the Mac M2 (https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/4922vs4923/Apple-M2-8-Core-3500-MHz-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-6800U).
Now, it may be 25% slower, even its power is enough for very serious work. You could definitely use Photoshop or open very large MS Office files on it if you wanted to. And if I want, I can connect a large eGPU to it to edit 4k video.
It may not be the ideal solution for you on cost effectiveness, but the extra flexibility more than makes up for it.
In the meanwhile, you're stuck with Apple Mx processors as they are. Not only you're at Apple's mercy, but if one day you find out the device doesn't fulfill the needs for your workload anymore, your only option is buying a new device.
THAT's not very cost-effective either.
Heat was such a major factor in me going back to MacBooks rather than an iPad Pro. The original reason I ditched Mac laptops was that they ran so hot and loud. I shouldn't be burning my leg hairs off using my LAPtop in my LAP.
Except photo and video doesn’t scale linearly with GPU, so no. Anyway, you are welcome to look at available benchmarks.
Please, enough with this nonsense. Stop trying to sell an underpowered moped to folks who need a real car.
There is no computer in the world (or in fact, any tool) that can do it all. If your job changes, you’d need a new tool. I fail to understand what’s so strange about this basic fact or how your moped is supposed to solve the global transportation problem.
Isn't it what you are doing, trying to "sell" an "underpowered model" (Mx line) on the grounds of being more power efficient?
If your argument is for power, why not get an i9?
I find it hypocritical that you criticize me for showing a portable solution that could be flexible for many workloads, and then you advocate for the Mx line, which is exactly the same thing.
Exactly. Apple's solutions only solve a limited problem. That's the issue. And right now, because they are being sloppy on their operating system, they aren't even solving what they proposed themselves to do.
I’m not trying to sell anything. I’m saying that Mx line makes superior laptops because they deliver same or better performance than x86 laptop solution without the drawbacks associated with high power consumption of x86 platforms.
Because I need a portable solution. If you need pure power and don’t care about portability you should get a Threadripper Pro or something similar.
You are not showing us a portable solution. You are showing us an underpowered handheld gaming console that doesn’t have a proper keyboard or display. I can’t write code on that thing without hooking it to a full workspace setup. This mere fact makes it worthless to any professional.
It’s not an issue. It’s the reality of the industry. No computer out there solves the “full problem” (whatever that might be).
I have no idea what this means.
I’m not trying to sell anything. I’m saying that x64 line makes superior laptops because they deliver same or better performance than the Mx laptop solution without the drawbacks associated with the lack of software / hardware flexibility associated with Apple.
Because I need a portable and flexible solution.
So let's get down to business.
The GPD Win 4 will give you a score of 1523 single thread (https://gpd.hk/gpdwin4).
Are you suggesting that you can't do absolutely nothing with a system that scores 1523 single thread?
Because the Macbook Pro, which is used for production work, will give you 1872 single core: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/20028451
Performance-wise, they should be very close. But you keep irrationally arguing that one is a toy and the other isn't, even though the "toy" runs full-blown Windows, has USB ports and is expansible.
You just answered your own question.
Where have you seen anyone here advocating for a computer that solves the "full problem" for anyone?
No one here is arguing that. Because it would be ridiculous.
Last edited:
I think that apple silicon computers are closer to smartphone not a computer. If You need more power , more memory or storage You must buy new device. So You must pay more and more . This is very good for apple not for customers. If You dont need mobile device better choose is go to hackintosh with 12 or 13 th gen CPU.
Current smartphones are more powerful than you think. The reason we don't see full-blown OSes in them yet has more to do with licensing issues (no one wants to license Windows on ARM on a phone) and trading issues (if you add full-blown desktop systems to those devices, they will compete more directly with the declining PC market).
Of course, the GPU rendering would probably leave something to be desired, but for light to average tasks? Hell yes, smartphones have the processing power to do all that if you allow them to.