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.
Intel 12900HK is faster than M1 Max for both single and multi cores.
- Thread starter sunny5
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you need Windows then Intel 12900HK is a good chip to base a purchasing decision on.
But the chip alone is not the sole criteria on purchase.
I'd like to know what's its
3nm process will occur in 2023 so if you can wait you may be able to get a 3nm process M2 Max MBP 16" at 140W that will out bench a fully loaded 2019 Mac Pro that uses more than 1,400W
But the chip alone is not the sole criteria on purchase.
I'd like to know what's its
- performance per Watt
- how hot will it be at full tilt
- will it throttle after how many minutes at full tilt
- what's the battery life at full tilt
- what's the price
- how heavy with a laptop based on the Itel will be?
- how much power will it consume
3nm process will occur in 2023 so if you can wait you may be able to get a 3nm process M2 Max MBP 16" at 140W that will out bench a fully loaded 2019 Mac Pro that uses more than 1,400W
Last edited:
X86 was inferior to PPC and there is no doubt about it.
Problem is that Intel (and to some level) could and did pour far more resources into X86 than Motorola (or whatever they called themselves on any given day) could afford and IBM only gave a half effort for desktop CPUs (G5).
Hence you had CoreDuo at 65nm while the G5 was still at 90.
Same thing could happen in the future but for the time the numbers go the other way and hence nothing x86 can really compete.
Also back in the PPC pretty much everything was still 1 CPU with 1 core with dual setups being highend.
These days anything below 8 core is lowend which does create more issues that the x86 just can't handle as well.
Problem is that Intel (and to some level) could and did pour far more resources into X86 than Motorola (or whatever they called themselves on any given day) could afford and IBM only gave a half effort for desktop CPUs (G5).
Hence you had CoreDuo at 65nm while the G5 was still at 90.
Same thing could happen in the future but for the time the numbers go the other way and hence nothing x86 can really compete.
Also back in the PPC pretty much everything was still 1 CPU with 1 core with dual setups being highend.
These days anything below 8 core is lowend which does create more issues that the x86 just can't handle as well.
you sure get cranky when people aren't impressed by what you post.
Last Macs that could not run 64bit were discontinued almost 15 years ago and haven't seen an OS update for a decade.
Any SW vendor still shipping anything in 32Bit needs to be thrown of a cliff (which Apple did).
Intel deserves a high level of healthy skepticism.
One other requirement: that it be shipping in volume.
So no locked down OS at all. They did not lock down anything, they just do not provide documentation, which is bad, but on a totally different level. And is not a lock down.
Imo all your „issues“ are no issues at all. Nothing is locked down, the only thing that does not run on M1 is x86 virtualization.
But then again, Arm virtualization is not possible on x86 either, so that‘s a draw
Last edited:
good one..thank god we dont have to tolerate 32-bit support until year 2100..
thank god you dont say anything about flash support being dead
Apple is just moving forward...while windows and OEM cannot do that because they will loose a lot of market because of its legacy support...they will support it even after 100 years or until a new CEO will come around that will force the world to move on
All the real pro apps are moved to 64-bit support...the rest of apps that are just 32-bit then they are not worth it since the developers dont care about it why you should?! there are so many apps out there..
With how long the lead times are with the M1 Max and M1 Pro I do not see prices dropping for the $2499 base model 16" to $2,149 by January.
You thought it's a desktop chip and yet it was not. Why blame me for what?
Clarification: “Intel 7” uses a 10 nanometer process. Intel just renamed it for branding purposes.
Intel Rebadges 10nm Enhanced SuperFin Node as "Intel 7," Invents Other Creative Node Names
Intel, in a move comparable to its competitors' Performance Rating system from the 1990s, has invented a new naming scheme for its in-house foundry nodes to claim technological parity with contemporaries such as TSMC and Samsung, that are well into the sub-10 nm class. Back in the i586 era, when...
This happened to Intel before. When the original Athlon came out it was eating the Pentium 4's lunch. Then intel released Core and that held sway for quite some time. And you are correct, it made them lazy. It is a cycle that I see Apple falling into as well in the past. What comes around goes around.
Yet, it's not different from TSMC 7nm. Intel 10nm = TSMC 7nm. Instead, it's slightly better than TSMC.Clarification: “Intel 7” uses a 10 nanometer process. Intel just renamed it for branding purposes.
Intel Rebadges 10nm Enhanced SuperFin Node as "Intel 7," Invents Other Creative Node Names
Intel, in a move comparable to its competitors' Performance Rating system from the 1990s, has invented a new naming scheme for its in-house foundry nodes to claim technological parity with contemporaries such as TSMC and Samsung, that are well into the sub-10 nm class. Back in the i586 era, when...www.techpowerup.com
I would wait to see how much power this chip consumes before drawing any conclusion...
1.) Intel can’t probably do this performance for longer time (say, 5 minutes)
2.) will run hot and eat battery quickly. Will throttle after a while, degrading performance
3.) Will not be able to do this solely on battery
4.) it’s just CPU perforamnce with much higher TDP. But these days, whole and real world peformance depends on many other components - neural processing unit and a mainly GPU COMBINED.
Intel would not be able to compete with M1 Max at all without paired with another power hungry part - GPU. So, what we will get? 5 minut of high performance, heating to boil the water, with battery lasting for 30 minutes and then what? Throttling. And all of that without GPU with even comparatively close performance.
2.) will run hot and eat battery quickly. Will throttle after a while, degrading performance
3.) Will not be able to do this solely on battery
4.) it’s just CPU perforamnce with much higher TDP. But these days, whole and real world peformance depends on many other components - neural processing unit and a mainly GPU COMBINED.
Intel would not be able to compete with M1 Max at all without paired with another power hungry part - GPU. So, what we will get? 5 minut of high performance, heating to boil the water, with battery lasting for 30 minutes and then what? Throttling. And all of that without GPU with even comparatively close performance.
Don’t fall for intels marketing. Intel 7 is still 10nm.
for 10nm alder lake to compete with TSMC‘s 5nm while using legacy x86 architecture is an achievement in itself.
NM itself is a marketing even for TSMC. In fact, Intel 10nm or 7nm has more density than TSMC 7nm and therefore, they are similar process.
How has Apple ”forcefully” taken away Windows support? Boot Camp was always an afterthought, and it had been years since Apple even listed it as a feature on its website. They have stated that Microsoft has “all the tools necessary” to bring Windows on ARM to Macs through virtualization, but that the decision is up to Microsoft. Parallels has proven there is no technical limitation to making it work.
Whoever is responsible the fact is Windows support had been weakened with this processor change. That said I am not advocating Apple should have remained with Intel because of this but rather pointing out it is a negative to the new AS systems.
I might reach out to the desktop team at work and ask what their plans are for the new M1 systems. We have a lot of Macs deployed throughout the enterprise along with a number of Windows specific software solutions. I suspect Windows on M1 will be provided by some form of Virtual PC technology.
I highly doubt they will be competing with Apple in that arena. I’m just glad they are at least attempting new things now. It’s a start.
They never ran back to Intel. They only transitioned to Intel once, stayed a while, then moved on. Intel wishes they would run back.