Intel 12900HK is faster than M1 Max for both single and multi cores.

[Bug-Creator]

I have a sneaky suspicion that the Mac Pro will be M2 based.

Depends on how far out that is and wether "M2" will be based on the A15 or A16.

Current rumors suggest that the even bigger M1s will be based on putting 2 or 4 M1Max dies into 1 SoC. Which will be massive for SW that can go that parallel but next to nothing for single threaded SW ( unless they allow for single cores to clock higher).

 

[G46&Fbnth5]

Well, M1 Pro/Max is basically a one year old chip…

 

[vir]

These are non-things.

 

[Falhófnir]

That’s quite an impressive benchmark! However, I find it hard to believe that this chip has the same TDP as the previous one hard to believe. That would mean that Intel pulled a 45% YoY seemingly out of nowhere.

In fact, they didn’t only beat the M1 Pro/Max, they beat their latest DESKTOP CPU (11900K) with a mobile chip. How?

On the other hand, maybe the inclusion of the efficiency cores in Intel’s architecture was that good. Maybe that meant they could afford higher clocks for the performance cores without an outrageous power consumption. But, if that’s the case, they can’t do that next year, the efficiency cores are already there It’s kind of like when they increased the core count for mobile CPUs (2017-2018, I believe). Multicore performance got a sizable boost but then they went back to 2-4% performance/watt increases YoY.

Apple has been getting regular 20% improvements YoY for their CPUs, let’s not get too excited because Intel has managed to do that a *single* year.

Not that Intel's TDPs even really mean anything anymore, the '45W' chip in the Intel 16" MacBook Pro basically sat at a sustained 60W under load.

 

[MauiPa]

Barely eked out is a good description. Took 14 cores to do it, and I can’t find internal graphics benchmarks, nor TDP or memory bandwidth. So it might be a nip faster, but not markedly so

Also what do they charge? Will laptops incorporating these chips be competitively priced (gotta pay that famous Intel tax). Battery life? Aren’t they like a 125 w TDP or something?

No question that this is great news. Just that it would be better news at low power, and better graphics

 

[leman]

1. How many laptops do you have to choose from that feature the M1? Go on and count them for me.

At least one 1.7kg 14" laptop, which is more than one can say about Intel i9 laptops

2. I think you're used to over-thin Macs and their abysmal thermal profile. Yeah, I know exactly how it feels to have a computer that constantly throttles. Thankfully most high-end PC laptops can sustain their turbo, as I've now experienced.

The 16" Intel i9 Macbook (which I happen to own) performs within 20% of any other laptop that features same CPU in sustained performance, and the only laptops that outperform is are much larger and heavier machines with desktop-class cooling. So again, not sure what you mean here.

3. Why on God's green earth are you doing heavy workloads on battery?! Are you out in the woods running scientific analysis or cutting Hollywood movies? Those people do exist, but most if not all of those types have employees at production studios they upload to from on-site to do those workloads.

Because that's how I like to work. I move all the time with my laptop. Right now I am comfortably sitting on my sofa, my 16" on my lap, running a statistical simulation while I type this. Why should I be tethered to the desk and the charger all the time? Technological advances should give us more flexibility, not take it from us.

 

[leman]

Also what do they charge? Will laptops incorporating these chips be competitively priced (gotta pay that famous Intel tax). Battery life?

The price and battery life will probably stay the same as now. A Dell XPS 15" with Tiger Lake i9 and 3050 Ti is $1999, same as the base 14" (with the cut down M1 Pro).

 

[senttoschool]

Hmm, at what, 45W or 65W TDP? Still toasty. Meanwhile Apple set the M1 Pro and Max at what, 30W max? The M1 in the MacBook Air has like what, 10W TDP?

Don't fall for marketing. The advertised TDP is just the long-term sustained watt. AMD and Intel CPUs can boost and consume much more power. For example, 8-core Tiger Lake 65w boosts over 100w.

Meanwhile, M1 Pro/Max is 30w max. Not a single watt more.

 

[Andropov]

Why on God's green earth are you doing heavy workloads on battery?! Are you out in the woods running scientific analysis [...]?

...yes? That's what some of us buy *laptops* for.

 

[Andropov]

Not that Intel's TDPs even really mean anything anymore, the '45W' chip in the Intel 16" MacBook Pro basically sat at a sustained 60W under load.

Yeah, I know. What I meant is that I expect these CPU's TDP to be even further away from the advertied TDP on normal use.

 

[bobcomer]

The thing is, even if Intel takes the performance crown for their top crop i9 CPU, this has little practical significance. The vast majority of Adler Lake laptops, especially those in compact laptops, are going to be considerably less impressive.

That's a good point, and one advantage of Intel's, many different levels of chips with many different price points -- from less than the iPhone mini cost, to as much as you want to spend -- you cover a lot of different uses that way.

 

[vir]

The battery is fine.

 

[MrGunny94]

If we are talking mobility I doubt we'll see the i9 chip in a machine like the current MBP chassis. Either way it doesn't matter anymore we ain't getting Intel back on MBP unless something drastic happens.

 

[Andropov]

I also walk around with it on battery and do things, including heavy things, for hours before plugging in

Why on God's green earth are you doing heavy workloads on battery?!

 

[vir]

We had a moment.

 

[EPO75]

Apple is using 5nm while Intel is using 7nm which is one gen ago. I dont think that's a fair comparison.

The M2 should be out early 2022 and should come with improved CPU and GPU performance over the M1, followed by the M2 Pro and M2 Max.

So this Intel CPU should be going head to head with the M2 and it's variant instead of the M1.

And perhaps but probably not the Mac Pro's will be on A16 tech as they will be introduced end of 2022, they have a lot in store.

Intel is not bad, just messed up with their fabs, would be good to see them innovate as this is great for the market.

 

[zarathu]

There are lots of chips faster than the m1Pro and M1max! Most of them are Intel and AMD.

THAT’S NOT THE POINT. The point is that there are no chips that are faster that run cooler with less power requirements. If you have a desktop with the ability for a 240 volt line and giant fans and nitrogen cooling it doesn’t matter how hot they get.

The key is speed and low power so you can put it in a laptop and put it on your lap, and be able to talk with friend while working(and hear them).

 

[hefeglass]

The integrated GPU is not going to touch what you see on the m1pro m1max..and there are no dedicated engines for certain tasks, which is what really pushes AS beyond the competition. Intel cant do that without vertical integration

 

[Andropov]

A PC laptop is perfectly fine to do something heavy-esque within the realm of a few hours before plugging in. You know, the amount of time before your butt naturally gets tired and you get up to walk around and plug the thing in. I hope that helps.

We must have very different concepts of what a heavy workflow is. I have a 16" MBP, which we can all agree is one of the Intel-based laptops with better battery life, and I cann't even get 2 hours of battery life when editing photos in Lightroom (which isn't a particularly heavy workload). Running truly heavy workflows, like GPU-based numerical simulations? Less than an hour.

That may be enough if you are indeed in the coach, but for cafeterias, train rides, flights, not carrying a charger if you go to work at a library for a couple hours...

 

[vir]

I made my case.

 

[leman]

I have the 16" Zephyrus M16 and it is not much larger or heavier at all (4 and a half pounds), especially considering the new thick boy MBP redesign. I also walk around with it on battery and do things, including heavy things, for hours before plugging in naturally because I'm not sitting on the couch for an entire day.

Compared to the 2019 16" Intel MBP, the ROG M16 is around 20% larger volume-wise, only 40% faster in Cinebench (that's despite two generations of Intel CPU updates), has around two hours less battery life, runs hotter (52C vs. 42C on the chassis) and considerably louder (56db vs. 46db). It's a great gaming laptop. It's not a very good work machine.
Besides, the CPU quickly throttles after a few Cinebench runs (by around 10%), unlike the Intel MBP. So I have to say that I don't really understand your comment about poor thermals of the Intel MBP.

Let's say that the next ROG Zephyrus will get the Alder Lake i9, which will make it marginally faster than the 8+2 M1 Pro. For a professional needing CPU performance, a 14" M1 Pro will be cheaper, won't throttle (unlike the Zephyrus), will be much smaller and lighter, offer three to four times the battery life and no-compromise performance when not plugged. So again, why would anyone chose the Intel i9 in such a scenario?

As the for the 14" comment, I have no idea what smaller laptop features the i9 as I'm not in the market for one, but I do see the top of the line Ryzen featuring in laptops quite often to fit that role. Yeah, we have choice over here. It's kinda refreshing.

As I said before, having choice is great. Although again, I am not sure why one would want to buy a Zen3 Cezanne when the M1 Pro is almost twice as fast, costs the same, runs much cooler and double the battery life...

 

[zarathu]

My wife’s intel 2019 13 inch MBP works great for her. She only uses the internet, and looks at photos of kittens. She never uses it on her lap and its plugged in 95% of the time.

 

[falainber]

yes Apple will cone running back to buy your chips….. no they will not ?

They already did it once.

 

[leman]

Use the silent power profile featured on most laptops for cool and quiet operation. Just in case you're not aware.

And have your performance cut down by a significant margin...

I'm gonna chill out with the belligerence, I've made my case

So far the case you've made that we should be buying larger computers with worse battery life, that require constant power profile micromanagement to achieve acceptable user experience... why that is preferable, I still don't know. Something with running x32 games if I understand correctly...

 

[falainber]

Compared to the 2019 16" Intel MBP, the ROG M16 is around 20% larger volume-wise, only 40% faster in Cinebench (that's despite two generations of Intel CPU updates), has around two hours less battery life, runs hotter (52C vs. 42C on the chassis) and considerably louder (56db vs. 46db). It's a great gaming laptop. It's not a very good work machine.
Besides, the CPU quickly throttles after a few Cinebench runs (by around 10%), unlike the Intel MBP. So I have to say that I don't really understand your comment about poor thermals of the Intel MBP.

Let's say that the next ROG Zephyrus will get the Alder Lake i9, which will make it marginally faster than the 8+2 M1 Pro. For a professional needing CPU performance, a 14" M1 Pro will be cheaper, won't throttle (unlike the Zephyrus), will be much smaller and lighter, offer three to four times the battery life and no-compromise performance when not plugged. So again, why would anyone chose the Intel i9 in such a scenario?




As I said before, having choice is great. Although again, I am not sure why one would want to buy a Zen3 Cezanne when the M1 Pro is almost twice as fast, costs the same, runs much cooler and double the battery life...

Have there ever been MBPs that did not throttle?