Well, Alder Lake is slow and HOT, is Intel going to solve it? š¤Ŗ
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.
M series chips are still slow... Are they gonna solve it?
- Thread starter sunny5
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What??? People pay the same or more for EQUIVALENT pc???? Ehm, where do u live? Helloooo, planet Earth here!
Btw, efficiency can be useful on a mba, but who spend above 2500 for a mbp, not mentioning 4000 for mstudio, wants power, not saving on utility bills. This āefficiencyā seems an exscuse for mitigate the lacks of performance
So u say that i have look for specific benchmarks im interested in, right?
Well, how can i know which apps ill use in future? Maybe tomorrow iāll need to make huge rar archives compressed to the most extreme limit, or maybe iāll need to upscale some photos or videos. U dont like car analogies ok, so ill make a compare to video cards. Benchmarks are made on most played and most graphics/effects (ray tracing) loaded games. If a card performs better than all others in all games i dont have to worry that tomorrow a new game will be released and that card will perform slower than my 3 years old card i had before. It seems that it dont works this way when talking of cpus. So if even geekbench isnt a trustable source, how can i know if a newly bought mac is faster than my old other than predicting future?
I think there are more reasons than just utility bills. I can think of audio engineers and anyone who appreciates less fan noise would value the MacBook Pro. I can think of lots of people who value being able to work away from a wall plug with decent performance/battery.
Also, and this is a subjective thing, but most laptops (and pre-built desktops) that tout top tier graphical performance are visually unappealing to me. There is a 'gamer' aesthetic that is often assumed if you're buying a system with a powerful graphics card. And to be fair, a fan of that look might find apple's design 'pretentious'. but people are allowed to have preferences both ways.
At the end of the day, the current MacBook Pro ticks more boxes for me than the alternatives. And its not a blind loyalty thing. I will wholeheartedly agree that their 2016-2019 laptops were too compromised.
I don't know what to tell you, man. If you want to know how well a computer is going to perform a certain task or run a certain piece of software, running an entirely different piece of software that tests for something else probably won't get you a good answer. Obviously, you can't test for stuff you don't know you're going to end up using in the future, but that's not the fault of the test. Even with your GPU analogy, this applies. Just because card A beats card B in one game doesn't mean it'll beat it in every game. For example, some games are better optimised for AMD cards, while others do better with nVidia. And even then, gaming benchmarks won't tell you how the card performs at other GPU-heavy tasks ā those would require different benchmarks.
It would be great if you could run one generalised test and instantly know how your computer will handle every task and piece of software on earth, but that's just not realistic. In this case, it seems Handbrake is poorly optimised for Apple Silicon. No test will tell you that other than one that actually uses Handbrake.
Hmm also the same
"Doesn't really change the fact that Laptop chip's performance is poorer than PC side."
"Doesn't really change the fact that Smarthopne (Android / Apple) chip's performance is poorer than PC side."
and what exactly you wanted to say ? Because im missing the Point apart of the Fakt that you are comparing a Mobile plattform compared to a Desktop Plattform
Yes, people pay that for equivalent PCs. I live on earth. Iām not sure what youāre ranting about. You just canāt seem to comprehend that people want both power and efficiency if they can help it. When an equivalent PC uses 5 times the wattage (or more), it will affect the utility bills. Youāre hung up on utility bills for some reason. Nobody wants to pay extra for anything if they can help it. You have this false idea that just because people can afford something that they donāt care about wasting money somewhere else and that just isnāt true, Iām sorry.
Along with the fantasy that "gaming performance" is some sort of a single thing that you can describe with a single number, and of course it's not.
Desktop is another story, but M1 efficiency on the go is huge. The 14 Pro runs mostly in silence under load and MBA has a never-ending battery. 
I'm really not sure where this idea comes from the Apple is lying about performance. We have all seen the countless videos of the base 7-core GPU M1 MacBook Air outperforming the 2019 16" MacBook Pro in many computational tasks. Of course an integrated GPU will not compete across the board with dedicated GPUs, but the M1 is nothing less than a masterpiece of engineering and represents a significant point in the Mac's history. It has changed the game.
Itās because folks are doing comparisons that donāt take into account that the software being compared has been heavily optimized for Intel/Nvidia systems. They KNOW theyāre doing it, these days itās all about ācontentā rather than āquality contentā. Gotta keep the advertisement and YouTube gods happy with endless streams of attention grabbing content!
I don't see where there's a "huge problem" with the M-series.
GPU performance remains a bit lacklustre compared to the competition. But when you consider power usage and overall efficiency of M-series Macs then there's really no issue at all.
This obviously doesn't help those that just want cutting edge GPU performance on a Mac and don't care about power usage.
But the M-series has more than delivered on its promise overall.
The M-series lacking performance in terms of GPU is only a minor problem.
GPU performance remains a bit lacklustre compared to the competition. But when you consider power usage and overall efficiency of M-series Macs then there's really no issue at all.
This obviously doesn't help those that just want cutting edge GPU performance on a Mac and don't care about power usage.
But the M-series has more than delivered on its promise overall.
The M-series lacking performance in terms of GPU is only a minor problem.
Last edited:
Itās a simple fact that a large number of tech enthusiasts donāt really know a lot about tech. Which is understandable since like any subject, complexities build up the more you dive into the details.
Taking into account the human tendency to only read headlines of articles and you get this thread.
With that said, the games Apple showed off are Metal compatible. Which is why Shadow of the Tomb Raider is paraded around ad nauseum. That means the big obstacle for performance on Apple gpus (OpenGL) isnāt a factor.
NVidia gpus arguably have greater optimizations, considering theyāre the big dog in the gpu market and have their own suite of drivers on the most popular operating system. But without concrete evidence we can only speculate how much of an advantage that gives.
We do know for a fact that Appleās gpus do not have near the same number crunching power to the gpus they are compared to. (Not that tflops is a very good metric but I believe it plays a role in this case)
Which leads me to believe that Apple is leaning heavily on the M series enormous amount of memory bandwidth to keep the gpu fed. And in their demos they intentionally used large files to compare with the NVidia gpus.
what this answer have to do with what we was talking about? we were talking of performance, efficiency, and money/performance ratio. while now are we talking of fan noise and aestethic? what will be the next? packaging?
When comparing against higher-end laptops with NVidia dGPUs? Sure, there are still several areas where the M1 Pro and M1 Max GPUs are outclassed by mobile 3060 and 3070 chips. When comparing the base M1/M2 GPU against the integrated GPUs found in comparable machines, though, they're punching well above their weight with very little power consumption.
Coming from the slow and stagnant Intel iGPUs found in all Intel MacBook Airs + Mac Minis and most MacBook Pros + iMacs, base model GPU performance is easily one of the biggest things Apple gained by switching to their own chips.
Tbh, threads like this reads like school children arguing who has better toys.
Apple doesn't have to be at the top of the hill to win. I guess many are sore that Apple, being a nobody in the CPU and GPU provider world, suddenly came out swinging and they felt threaten for their favourite CPU/GPUs?
We should all instead celebrate that Apple came out with something different that will invariably light a fire (or maybe already lit?) under the others so as to spur them to come up with better designs.
Apple doesn't have to be at the top of the hill to win. I guess many are sore that Apple, being a nobody in the CPU and GPU provider world, suddenly came out swinging and they felt threaten for their favourite CPU/GPUs?
We should all instead celebrate that Apple came out with something different that will invariably light a fire (or maybe already lit?) under the others so as to spur them to come up with better designs.
yup. absolutely. I buy the whole package. and balancing power and efficiency 10000000% ties in to fan noise and heat. sorry that bugs you so much
The thing that bugs me so much is we cant talk honestly even being all apple users. Reason world says we are fanboys and idiots that defends apple at any cost. Fortunately they dont read these forums...yup. absolutely. I buy the whole package. and balancing power and efficiency 10000000% ties in to fan noise and heat. sorry that bugs you so much
I don't know where you think I'm being disingenuous. I'm being honest. I was seriously looking at non-apple options coming from my 2018 MacBook Pro, which did in fact have slow performance. All I'm saying is what frustrated me about the prospect of switching to 'faster' hardware on other platforms. What apple released with the M1 Pro and Max strikes a good balance of returning a good chunk of performance and while avoiding a lot of the pitfalls that I was dreading about jumping ship.
you're saying "yeah but they're still not the fastest" and I'm countering that they are not in fact "slow" and strike a good balance for myself and a lot of other people's needs. you're welcome to have different needs and advocate for those, just don't say mine are that of a "fanboy" or an "idiot."
Anyway, you seem really angry at people for disagreeing with you, so I think I'm about done as I think I've articulated my point well enough for any reasonable reader. Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
listen, point of this thread its not say m1 ultra is slow, but that's its far slower than declared by apple. u must have truly big balls to say to the entire world that your cpu/gpu its the most powerful, where its true only in an ad-hoc test u carefully prepared, and false in (almost) any other condition. efficiency, design, packaging, customer service, cool apple logo does not have nothing to do with the pure power. I'm an apple user and have no problem to say m1 ultra its (partially) a delusion as it's not miracolously powerful as everyone was expecting. That's it. So, what's, most of people's of this forum's problem, to just say the same instead of "yes its not so powerful BUT its energy efficient, BUT it makes less noise, BUT it makes less heat, BUT it has a cool packaging, BUT it fits my needs, BUT i not need that power, etc etc etc"? Got the point now?
From the very article you linked in the OP
āAnd yes, it is very impressive that Apple is accomplishing so much with (comparatively) so little power. Iām sure Appleās chart is accurate in showing that at the relative power and performance levels, the M1 Ultra does do slightly better than the RTX 3090 in that specific comparison.ā
I suspect you donāt comprehend the chart axesā labels, and like Quixote, are tilting at windmills š
Last edited: