Intel Alder Lake vs. Apple M1

[thenewperson]

You know, it's kind of funny. For years now Intel fans (and even Intel reps) kept saying that Cinebench isn't a real benchmark. Now that Intel is crushing Apple in Cinebench the tables seem to have turned and the Apple fans are saying it.

That’s not really turning tables much unless Apple fans were pointing to Cinebench as a good benchmark.

 

[bobcomer]

Intel processors would be better for backward compatibility and running Windows apps. That functionality has been taken away. If you need to run abandonware, the Mac is a poor choice. Microsoft will bend over backward to keep old apps running. Apple will give fair warning and tools for third-party devs to update their software, but won't hold back changes to the OS to accommodate those devs who won't.

This is a major shift in software development, and the reason why you're seeing more ISVs turn to a subscription model. Back in the day, you would write your app, toss it over the fence and never worry about it. You might release a new version every now and then, or maybe not. When software was largely distributed over physical media, this made sense. Now that software is mostly delivered online, we're seeing more incremental changes over time. Some devs and users have adapted to this model, others have not.

Already we've seen Apple deprecate frameworks like OpenGL. They've transitioned the Mac from 68K to PPC to Intel and now arm64. They dropped 16-bit support, then 32-bit support. Some software users paid for no longer runs. Or in many cases, users are relying on applications that the vendor no longer supports. With Intel Macs these users could use Windows via BootCamp, or at least run it natively in a VM x64. Now the only choice is a VM running ARM and emulating x86/x64.

Apple often will rip off the band-aid rather than drawing things out. They did the same with moving to USB-A, and then USB-C, the 64-bit transition, and others. Microsoft will have difficulty getting ISVs to support arm64. Apple has simply given them no other choice.

Yep, and that's pretty much why Apple is less than 2 digits in percentage of market and Microsoft easily dominates. Business hates things with no ROI like rewriting your apps for another platform. It's extremely hard to budget for something that doesn't make money in any way.

 

[robco74]

Yep, and that's pretty much why Apple is less than 2 digits in percentage of market and Microsoft easily dominates. Business hates things with no ROI like rewriting your apps for another platform. It's extremely hard to budget for something that doesn't make money in any way.

Mac sales are still very strong and the market is growing, even in the enterprise. This may be due to the halo effect of the iPhone and the move to BYOD in the workplace. More worrisome for MS is that Chromebook sales are also taking off. Many businesses are adapting and moving toward a service model. Of course, back in the day, writing code that wouldn't cross-compile was a big no-no, unless perhaps there is a major performance lift. This was of course because in the high-end space, there were multiple hardware platforms to choose from.

Microsoft has been late to the party for almost every change in the 21st century. They are no longer innovating and are playing catch up. Inertia has been their biggest ally, but they can't rely on that forever. They still have plenty of niche markets left as well.

But you've highlighted why the shift from sporadic to more recurring revenue streams has become increasingly important for businesses - including Apple.

 

[bombardier10]

It seems that even 11th Gen i7-11700K is more faster in Cinebench R23 than M1 Max )

 

[Analog Kid]

Apple is less than 2 digits in percentage of market

Bit of a sidebar here, but I’ve never seen market share presented on a logarithmic scale before…. And the quantization noise on that measurement— oh, my!

 

[crazy dave]

You know, it's kind of funny. For years now Intel fans (and even Intel reps) kept saying that Cinebench isn't a real benchmark. Now that Intel is crushing Apple in Cinebench the tables seem to have turned and the Apple fans are saying it.

It would be a little weird for Apple fans to have ever said CB is a good benchmark then since Apple was using exclusively Intel CPUs in Macs until last year and the only version of CB to run on the new M1 chips, R23, was almost immediately flagged by tech reviewers as being problematic on the new processor.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1328777333512278020

In contrast SPEC’s POV Ray does stress the core and the new Alder Lake chips dominate in that both over the M1 and previous gen Intel chips. They actually get a better relative score to the M1 in POV ray than in CB23. Whatever uarch changes Intel made really boosted CPU ray tracing by *a lot*.

So this really isn’t about “I don’t like it because it makes the M1 look bad”. I can point to to evidence that something about CB23 isn’t actually working right on the M1. And other renderers and ray tracers don’t have the same issue - even in those instances where Intel is still ahead by a lot in them.

 

[bombardier10]

It is very simple. Geekbench benchmark can show about 20 to 25 % (!) higher results for use .....faster memory.
Yes if we use only one memory slot without dual or four channels support geekbench scores will
be very low. Or if use for example 2666 Mhz vs 3600 MHz memory - geekbench will be very different.

And what about REAL apps (special for graphics/video) ? In this case the impact of memory speed on
apps performance is only 2 to 5 percent.

Conclusion. Geekbench add more points for M1 CPUs thanks to ultra fast memory. But that has little to do with
real-world performance.
On the other hand Cinebench R23 measures real speed od real apps. Thats all.

 

[crazy dave]

It is very simple. Geekbench benchmark can show about 20 to 25 % (!) higher results for use .....faster memory.
Yes if we use only one memory slot without dual or four channels support geekbench scores will
be very low. Or if use for example 2666 Mhz vs 3600 MHz memory - geekbench will be very different.

And what about REAL apps (special for graphics/video) ? In this case the impact of memory speed on
apps performance is only 2 to 5 percent.

Conclusion. Geekbench add more points for M1 CPUs thanks to ultra fast memory. But that has little to do with
real-world performance.
On the other hand Cinebench R23 measures real speed od real apps. Thats all.

Very little of what you’ve written here is accurate.

1) None of the M1 chips have particularly fast memory in terms of latency - standard lpddr 4/5 speeds.

2) What they do have, especially the M1 Pro/Max, and what certain GB and SPEC subtests do reward is high memory *bandwidth*.

3) We can test other compute benchmarks that don’t stress the memory systems at all and even stress the same components as CB23 and they don’t behave like CB23.

4) Real applications are a mix of different pressures including memory and compute. CB23 tests rendering and ray tracing. That’s it. Other compute benchmarks test other facets. The reason SPEC and GB include subtests is to reflect this reality. CB23 may be more reflective of your workflow. In which case, great! Likely it won’t be because that’s not how most applications actually work.

 

[aevan]

Intel processors would be better for backward compatibility and running Windows apps. That functionality has been taken away. If you need to run abandonware, the Mac is a poor choice. Microsoft will bend over backward to keep old apps running. Apple will give fair warning and tools for third-party devs to update their software, but won't hold back changes to the OS to accommodate those devs who won't.

This is a major shift in software development, and the reason why you're seeing more ISVs turn to a subscription model. Back in the day, you would write your app, toss it over the fence and never worry about it. You might release a new version every now and then, or maybe not. When software was largely distributed over physical media, this made sense. Now that software is mostly delivered online, we're seeing more incremental changes over time. Some devs and users have adapted to this model, others have not.

Already we've seen Apple deprecate frameworks like OpenGL. They've transitioned the Mac from 68K to PPC to Intel and now arm64. They dropped 16-bit support, then 32-bit support. Some software users paid for no longer runs. Or in many cases, users are relying on applications that the vendor no longer supports. With Intel Macs these users could use Windows via BootCamp, or at least run it natively in a VM x64. Now the only choice is a VM running ARM and emulating x86/x64.

Apple often will rip off the band-aid rather than drawing things out. They did the same with moving to USB-A, and then USB-C, the 64-bit transition, and others. Microsoft will have difficulty getting ISVs to support arm64. Apple has simply given them no other choice.

You described a specific case, and I get why this is important to some people. However, for the vast majority of creative professionals, this was the right decusion. New tools, methods and workflows.

Being able to work faster, for longer, with true mobility - opens up new possibilities.

In fact, one of my bigger gripes with Windows is the insistance on backwards compatibility and older technologies. I get why this is their approach, but it also has serious downsides. This is why we have bloat, 32bit apps, leftover UI paradigms, etc.

Again, there are valid reasons for that and for some people, an Intel based X86 PC with Windows will trully be a better choice. But for the majority of users - the path Apple took is the future, something that will truly breathe life into the Mac platform. And personal computers as a whole. It’s the best decision Apple could’ve made for 99% of their users.

 

[aevan]

It is very simple. Geekbench benchmark can show about 20 to 25 % (!) higher results for use .....faster memory.
Yes if we use only one memory slot without dual or four channels support geekbench scores will
be very low. Or if use for example 2666 Mhz vs 3600 MHz memory - geekbench will be very different.

And what about REAL apps (special for graphics/video) ? In this case the impact of memory speed on
apps performance is only 2 to 5 percent.

Conclusion. Geekbench add more points for M1 CPUs thanks to ultra fast memory. But that has little to do with
real-world performance.
On the other hand Cinebench R23 measures real speed od real apps. Thats all.

We still don’t know the “real-world performance” of the Alder Lake computers. Currently, we can only judge real-world performance of current Intel computers and M1s are, frankly, sweeping the floor with them.

 

[jdb8167]

We still don’t know the “real-world performance” of the Alder Lake computers. Currently, we can only judge real-world performance of current Intel computers and M1s are, frankly, sweeping the floor with them.

People do have working Alder Lake CPUs now and they confirm the early benchmarks. What we don’t have are notebook versions of the CPUs yet. Dave2D has a video talking about the challenges of getting the cooling for the i9 Alder Lake right.

 

[robco74]

You described a specific case, and I get why this is important to some people. However, for the vast majority of creative professionals, this was the right decusion. New tools, methods and workflows.

Being able to work faster, for longer, with true mobility - opens up new possibilities.

In fact, one of my bigger gripes with Windows is the insistance on backwards compatibility and older technologies. I get why this is their approach, but it also has serious downsides. This is why we have bloat, 32bit apps, leftover UI paradigms, etc.

Again, there are valid reasons for that and for some people, an Intel based X86 PC with Windows will trully be a better choice. But for the majority of users - the path Apple took is the future, something that will truly breathe life into the Mac platform. And personal computers as a whole. It’s the best decision Apple could’ve made for 99% of their users.

I agree, and it works for me, and it works for most companies I've worked for. But with every change, there are some users who get left behind. On balance, I think the course Apple is charting is the correct one over the long term, and they will gain more users than they lose. But for those who need to run that one Windows app, their options are now limited.

MS should seriously consider splitting the ecosystem again, as they did in the days of 98 vs NT. Keep W10 or 11 around as a legacy platform, receiving only security updates, but put all consumer facing updates, including DirectX, into a new version of Windows that abandons much of the cruft. Much how Apple kept macOS 9 around for a while after introducing OS X. Customers can dual boot if they need to.

 

[aevan]

In backwards compatibility. There's no ROI for rewriting for a new platform.

Of course there is - you don’t think all those devs coming out with M1 native apps are doing it for fun?

It’s simple - if you want to keep your customers and grow your business, you will implement new technologies. New technologies, new opportunities. For a lot of devs this is an opportunity and, in fact, app sales usually rise when they implement new stuff.

 

[m1maverick]

Mac sales are still very strong and the market is growing, even in the enterprise. This may be due to the halo effect of the iPhone and the move to BYOD in the workplace. More worrisome for MS is that Chromebook sales are also taking off. Many businesses are adapting and moving toward a service model. Of course, back in the day, writing code that wouldn't cross-compile was a big no-no, unless perhaps there is a major performance lift. This was of course because in the high-end space, there were multiple hardware platforms to choose from.

I will be interested to see what growth Apple will continue to have in the enterprise now that the Macintosh no longer natively runs Windows software. Unless there's good emulation for x64 software on AS Macs I can see their growth in the enterprise slowing.

 

[aevan]

I agree, and it works for me, and it works for most companies I've worked for. But with every change, there are some users who get left behind. On balance, I think the course Apple is charting is the correct one over the long term, and they will gain more users than they lose. But for those who need to run that one Windows app, their options are now limited.

MS should seriously consider splitting the ecosystem again, as they did in the days of 98 vs NT. Keep W10 or 11 around as a legacy platform, receiving only security updates, but put all consumer facing updates, including DirectX, into a new version of Windows that abandons much of the cruft. Much how Apple kept macOS 9 around for a while after introducing OS X. Customers can dual boot if they need to.

Well, they keep trying something similar but whenever they do a hard-cut of any kind, there is an uproar.

It’s not an easy position to be in.

 

[Bandaman]

People do have working Alder Lake CPUs now and they confirm the early benchmarks. What we don’t have are notebook versions of the CPUs yet. Dave2D has a video talking about the challenges of getting the cooling for the i9 Alder Lake right.

Pretty pathetic that the Alienware desktop throttles from poor cooling. Dunno why they thought it would be a good idea to just use a single fan radiator on that convection oven Intel CPU.

 

[m1maverick]

MS should seriously consider splitting the ecosystem again, as they did in the days of 98 vs NT. Keep W10 or 11 around as a legacy platform, receiving only security updates, but put all consumer facing updates, including DirectX, into a new version of Windows that abandons much of the cruft. Much how Apple kept macOS 9 around for a while after introducing OS X. Customers can dual boot if they need to.

IMO that's exactly what Windows 11 does.

 

[bobcomer]

Of course there is - you don’t think all those devs coming out with M1 native apps are doing it for fun?

It’s simple - if you want to keep your customers and grow your business, you will implement new technologies. New technologies, new opportunities. For a lot of devs this is an opportunity and, in fact, app sales usually rise when they implement new stuff.

You're talking about consumer facing software, not what businesses write for or support for themselves -- IT is a cost, not a profit center.

 

[leman]

Yep, and that's pretty much why Apple is less than 2 digits in percentage of market and Microsoft easily dominates.

Apple is in less than 2 digits of market because the cheapest computer they sell is $1000. They only target the premium market, and they do very well in it.

 

[bobcomer]

IMO that's exactly what Windows 11 does.

Pretty much, but it still runs the old stuff. I don't particularly care it needs newish hardware, just that it runs the old stuff.

 

[aevan]

You're talking about consumer facing software, not what businesses write for or support for themselves -- IT is a cost, not a profit center.

Macs are mostly targeted towards creative professionals, business users, home users, etc. - who are all consumers. It's a great move for the majority of Mac userbase. These machines and Apple's decision to make their own chips is not perfect for everyone - just for the most of their customers. Macs are productivity devices, first and foremost. This is a great example of knowing your audience.

 

[robco74]

You're talking about consumer facing software, not what businesses write for or support for themselves -- IT is a cost, not a profit center.

I disagree. Done well, and without pinching pennies, IT can be a huge boost to productivity and efficiency. Quite a few businesses are writing internal software either as web services that can be accessed from any client, and/or are increasingly writing their own iOS and Android apps.

Many of the people who got burned by having to keep ancient versions of IE around for years just to run legacy apps have not forgotten. If your vendor is not providing regular maintenance and security updates, you need to choose a new vendor.

 

[bobcomer]

Apple is in less than 2 digits of market because the cheapest computer they sell is $1000. They only target the premium market, and they do very well in it.

Most of the PC's we buy are more than $1000. Businesses know they can't trust backwards compatibility, so it's not even on the list to check prices. The last Mac I purchased for a business was to run a colorgetter scanner, 28 years ago.

Sometimes it sucks just working in IT for normal businesses...

 

[bobcomer]

I disagree. Done well, and without pinching pennies, IT can be a huge boost to productivity and efficiency. Quite a few businesses are writing internal software either as web services that can be accessed from any client, and/or are increasingly writing their own iOS and Android apps.

Many of the people who got burned by having to keep ancient versions of IE around for years just to run legacy apps have not forgotten. If your vendor is not providing regular maintenance and security updates, you need to choose a new vendor.

All I can say is I've never worked for such a company.

 

[aevan]

Yep, and that's pretty much why Apple is less than 2 digits in percentage of market and Microsoft easily dominates. Business hates things with no ROI like rewriting your apps for another platform. It's extremely hard to budget for something that doesn't make money in any way.

I think Apple is more concerned about profits, they are probably the most profitable laptop manufacturer on the market, even with a smaller market share (they are 4th in laptop shipments and growing, though, so I wouldn't call them "small").

As for the market share - they are not making computers for everyone, they are making them for specific users. For a lot of professionals out there - from artists, musicians and video editors to engineers, business people and scientists - they make one of the best laptops on the market, mostly due to their on silicon. So while their decision may not be the best for everyone (like the IT example you gave) - I'm sure you understand how, from their business perspective and the perspective of the majority of their customers, the decision to switch to their own silicon is a game changer.